Here’s a comment that didn’t make it past the censor. Mr Dusablon raises the very valid point that without training, it is almost impossible to disarm a person who is pointing a gun at you. Kinda puts a dent in that argument that if a person is armed, the gun is more likely to be used against them…
In addition to my last, would you please tell me how someone would disarm you if you had a gun held on them, let alone use that gun against you?
Let me tell you that with a modicum of training, far less than what I have received over the years, and unless facing against someone who has been extensively trained otherwise, one cannot have their gun ripped from their hand without being able to fire a shot first. In fact, aggressively reaching for the gun in someone else’s hand is tantamount to suicide.
Criminals have no such training. Most spousal abusers have no such training. As such, the whole “the bad guy will just take it from you and use it against you” line is a pure fallacy.
Also, the fact that you do not think a gun would have made that victim safer is no surprise to me as it has become clear that you are of the clear opinion that guns are inherently evil and cannot be used to preserve life, only take it.
And once more, in the interest of shedding as much light on the issue as possible, this will be sent to multiple sources in case you see it fit not to publish this comment.