@admitsWrongIfProven @freemo @pj @thatguyoverthere @lmrocha yes it's the extreme case, both individually and collectively, that requires a gun. But if one of those cases comes up, a gun is often the only thing that will solve it.
Moreover, those extreme cases are less likely to come up if guns are available.
Switzerland doesn't get invaded for a couple of reasons. Terrain is one, armed citizenry is another.
Police stations and gun stores rarely get robbed for the same reason.
@mike805 @admitsWrongIfProven @freemo @thatguyoverthere @lmrocha
The proponents of "guns for all" cite two reasons as far as I can understand:
1️⃣ Protection from violent ***individuals*** with or without guns, and
2️⃣ Protection from a rogue ***government*** that wants to take your guns.
In the first case, the ***regulation*** of gun ownership is not an issue, while in the second it is irrelevant because you are already in the middle of a civil war and, one way or another, you'll find or be given a gun soon.
