- Joined
- Apr 17, 2019
- Messages
- 21,784
- Reaction score
- 8,629
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Independent
I'm not convinced that video is actually such strong evidence for your case. It doesn't show the criminal arriving for some reason, but it seems likely that if he stepped up to the counter just like a normal customer and suddenly pulled out his gun, the clerk wouldn't be able to react quickly enough to draw his own weapon in response. Also, if a criminal is willing and able to kill their victims, knowing that they are or are likely to be armed just means they'll be more likely to kill victims immediately. Plus, if you significantly increase the number of guns in circulation, there will be more available to criminals, since pretty much all guns used in crimes will have been leally bought and owned at some point. You risk having more petty criminals having access to and the will to use firearms during their crimes like this.
The wider issue isn't clear cut and I'm not sure there is any easy right answer, but I certainly don't think this one example really progresses that debate in any way.
We don't need to increase the number of guns in circulation in order for people to have the right to defend themselves. We COULD decrease the number of crooks in circulation, though.