This is backed up by what I've read.
"Statistically", the majority of people who have a gun permit, seek out some kind of basic weapons training.
"Statistically", more armed people have survived a violent event than have unarmed people.
This can't be true simply based on the fact that not every violet event warrants gun use and because more unarmed people are victims of violence simply because there are more of them. Studies done on armed vs unarmed victims indicate you are more likely to be shot in a violent encounter if you have a gun.
If you have a statistic that backs up your claim, lets see it...
RUBBISH! That is all your comment warrants.
"Statistically", more armed homeowners have shot a home-invader before the police even start their cars.
Statistics don't support your conclusion and in fact show the opposite. All studies show owning a gun increase your chances of violence/death by that very gun, either to you or those in the home with the gun.
Do you have a study that backs up your claim? Lets see it...
Owning a gun doesn't protect you from violence. It only puts the odds of survival more in your favor.
So, back to that fantasy topic again? Surely you're not saying most gun owners are good, sane, right-thinking people? No? I'll stick to the stats thanks....
I will agree with "Better to have a gun and not need it, than to need it and not have it." even though it begs the question of what constitutes need. Most of our needs are imaginary and that was my original point. I own a handgun but I admit it's more likely it will be used on a family member, associate, or me than on a 'bad guy'. Still, right now I'm deluding myself that my family and I are safer with my gun and that I'm a sane, right-thinking person (like you) who is imune from all those nasty stats nobody likes to admit.
Some people shouldn't be allowed to have them.Generally, the majority of good, sane, right-thinking people do quite well with a gun.
Just gimme some truth...