Here's the problem with that logic: other people have them. Trust me, in a perfect world, people wouldn't have to use them or have them at all. Whether they are legal or not, people will still find a way to get their hands on one. I know when I need to fire at someone and I wouldn't do it unless my life or someone else's life were immediate danger. I live in a very rural area though and we don't have police. We have a sheriff's department spread out amongst several counties. I can't depend on them to show up before the worst case scenario happens. If a gunman is in my house, I can't do much of anything other than try to stall him. You can never know what is going through someone's mind. You can perceive what they might do, but in truth, if they are desperate enough to be wielding a weapon upon you, it's nearly impossible to tell what they are going to do. I wouldn't fire my gun at someone unless they were intending drawn or is in the process of drawing on me. If I should come across these types of situations, sometimes a weapon can be purely phychological, to deter them from doing anything further. The reason I have a gun is because I don't want to give someone that split second it takes to take my choice of life away.

great so you gun owners can kill each other then. I personally choose to resolve my problems without guns. People don't normally weild guns upon me. I guess I been lucky so far.

I don't wish anything like that to happen to you, or to anyone. I suppose it's something you won't understand unless you've been in that type of situation. I guess your one of those "learn the hard way" type of people. I admire your conviction though.

Possibly in a rural area. I can understand you wanting to own a gun. You can have some weirdo show up on your doorstep and you want them off your property. So you pull out your gun. Get off my lawn you say. And they pull theirs out. They shoot you. You die. Now lets say its me. I will be like ok take everything you want and I can keep my life, and please spare my children as well. Ok they come in take my tv, my video games. And some money. But I will keep my life and my family will be safe. Here are the keys to my car in case you needed a new one. Who is the winner. is it you that pulled out your gun and forced a violent confrontation which ended in your death. Or me, the guy who is still alive and singing? People respond well to kindness. Even criminals. Just be kind to others and maybe you will not need to use your gun. And in worst case scenario. Use your head to argue yourself out of a violent situation. Chances are, the criminal doesn't need the trouble of having to add you to their rap sheet. They just want your stuff. No-one is going to just flat out shoot you. But if you are confrontational and have a bad attitude, they just might shoot you. There is a reason why people developed the power of problem solving and language. So they can communicate and figure out solutions to solve these kinds of issues. This is not the Wild West it used to be. In your case you are simply stating that your gun is just a tool like any other. And I am stating that it is a very dangerous tool. I think both of our arguments make sense. But I am alive and your dead. And dead people don't make arguments. Get it?

Could you tell me that a psychopath will respond respond to kindness? Some people take and then kill, some just kill. Some people get off on that stuff. You won't know what their intentions are, and you can't assume what they are.

You are talking about Serial Killers. They are a rarity. The chances of you being attacked in your home by someone like that is very low. Its like getting killed by a plane in the middle of a desert. Its very rare for them to flat out attack a home owner in the middle of the night. Thats more like a movie than real life. It does happen. But those types of people are usually loners, and they pick some type of weak, defenseless targets. Like prostitutes, or women who walk in the middle of the night. You don't sound like a defenseless person. And even if you didn't have a gun. I doubt that they would know. They would probably assume you had one, and find easier pray. Yes possibly some areas should allow gun ownership. But bigger cities and high traffic areas should have strickter laws for buying a gun. Right now all you need to buy a gun is to fill out some background check form, and only 1% of people get denied. And if you don't want to do a background check, you can buy a gun from a gun show. This is all documented to be true. I checked with articles written in 2015 by CNN.

[quote]You are talking about Serial Killers. They are a rarity. The chances of you being attacked in your home by someone like that is very low. Its like getting killed by a plane in the middle of a desert. Its very rare for them to flat out attack a home owner in the middle of the night. Thats more like a movie than real life. It does happen. But those types of people are usually loners, and they pick some type of weak, defenseless targets. Like prostitutes, or women who walk in the middle of the night. You don't sound like a defenseless person. And even if you didn't have a gun. I doubt that they would know. They would probably assume you had one, and find easier pray. Yes possibly some areas should allow gun ownership. But bigger cities and high traffic areas should have strickter laws for buying a gun. Right now all you need to buy a gun is to fill out some background check form, and only 1% of people get denied. And if you don't want to do a background check, you can buy a gun from a gun show. This is all documented to be true. I checked with articles written in 2015 by CNN.[/quote] So the women who are walking alone at night should not be able to protect themselves? You're a -blam!-ing idiot dude.

A woman needs to ask herself what she is doing walking in the middle of the night in a dark secluded area in the first place, possibly she should avoid those areas

CNN? I'm SPENT lol

So you think it's ok then that someone can just get a gun without any background check?

Absolutely not. I can agree with you in that matter. In fact, I think the background check should be at least 5x more extensive if it were possible. When I bought my first gun, I was young and simply just wanted to do it because I could (weren't we all stupid kids at one point haha). I went to the store thinking I was gonna be there for like an hour waiting to get it because of the background checks the dealer has to run. It took longer to choose what I wanted than it had to actually run the check. At the time, I didn't think anything of it, but now I look back on it and think how stupid it was. I know how stupid I was, but it was more wrong that they only look to make sure you haven't committed a felony. That is by no means good criteria in which to purchase a gun. In my opinion, and you may disagree, I think that anyone who buys a gun needs to have been in the military, worked as a civil authority, or has taken a state or federal accredited instructed course on how to handle firearms. They also should be put through a few month class about use of force if they weren't trained in self defense. It astounds me that a student can spend years studying topics as trivial as gym class, but when it comes to selling firearms, they'd prefer to just hand them out in 15 min without a question as to why you are buying it or if you even know how to use it. This may be the part you agree with. However, I value knowledge, so I know how important it is to familiarize myself with what's best to defend myself in a worst case scenario should it happen.

So then you basically agree with the article then in essence, Ya I mean. What if for example. The person that is trying to get a gun has not committed any crime, but wants to buy a gun so they could commit one in the future. Should there not be some other type of checkup. Like checking their mental health, possibly their history. Etc. Seeing if they had any non violent crimes, or even small things like being violent. Etc.

That phsychological evaluation goes hand in hand with training. I remember when I joined the military they ran physicals and psyche evaluations 6 months before I had joined and a day before I had joined. They took day-long background checks with finger print scanners. Basically the whole nine yards. Why can't a similar process be geared towards gun ownership? And in regards to the article, or post, I don't think what the op posted is an agreeable topic. He simply said that "if you are a gun owner, you have my respect". Why should the fact that you own a gun earn you respect? No, I don't agree with what he said. He respects me because I spent way more than I wanted to on things I don't even want. I didn't really want guns, but I have them because it makes me feel safe, so I'm not helpless should something happen. And I know you are going to run the chances of that happining through your head. The fact that it CAN happen is reason enough for me to have one. What your view comes down to in the end is that nobody should have guns. But they exist either way. People will find a way to get their hands on one through illegal means also. We can't just not sell sell them and expect the world to become less violent. There will still be killings, whether we have them or not. Plenty of other countries exhibit that fact.