And the nerdy guy with a baseball bat posting on GAF is going to take on the hardened criminal breaking into his home with a baseball bat. Sure, good luck with that.
Yes, the nerdy guy who was airborne infantry before he stated being a nerd and pathetic apparently, yes.
Hardened criminal? Do you think that means their skulls are harder or something? What do you expect this 'hardened criminal' to be armed with?
And the question has everything to do with geography. You need to plan to an appropriate threat level, otherwise everyone has miniguns in turrets linked to thermal cameras. If I live in Brazil, I will plan differently than if I live in Canada, or the US, and if I lived in Uganda, I would plan differently again. It's not hard to understand. It's easy to say 'My plan is to have a gun'. That's nice. You better have a plan for if that is not possible though. You don't always get what you want. Yeah, people can lobby to change laws, but you also have to plan within the laws you have. So grow up, and stop acting like your plan in perfect and the only sensible course.
Actually, reading your replies to other people, you are an offensive little twerp. You level of discourse is childish at best. Even if you don't think they re offering substantive replies, ask them questions directly instead of insulting them. That just indicates you aren't interested in discussion either.
In your time in the U.S. you obviously haven't figured much out.
For starters, there isn't some omnipresent threat of gun violence running rampant in this country. I now live in St. Louis and have spent a ton of time working in East St. Louis, IL (highest violent crime rate in the U.S. YEAR AFTER YEAR). I do not carry a gun when working and I have never had a single problem. So in literally the most violent part of the U.S. you can walk around generally at your discretion and if you don't fuck with shit you don't get fucked with by and large. Its not like pockets of the U.S. are constantly being invaded by Vikings armed with AK-47's.
Second, you can't run a buyback program simply because no one wants to sell their guns. You know what gun enthusiasts would spend the buyback money on? MORE GUNS. Guns are fucking cool and fucking fun. As long as you act like a mentally capable grown ass adult with them. People don't own guns simply out of fear. They own guns because they like guns.
Can guns be dangerous? Sure. But more people die of cigarette related cancer and heart attacks than gun related deaths every year in the U.S., so are we going to start outlawing cigarettes and McDonalds now? Nope, we just let you know that you're an idiot for using them.
My point was that you can't just say guns = violence. That isn't proven and my example (which I used simply because I could highlight the gun culture there with greater insight) shows just that. The least violent state in the union has the highest gun ownership per capita. So trying to pain firearm ownership as going hand in hand with violence is obviously completely untrue. Violence goes hand in hand with culture and societal structure, not any one single inanimate object.
You really missed my point. Guns do not equal violence, but if they are not present in a situation, adding them generally only does bad things. They don't cause violence, but they make the effects of it a lot more serious. If you don't need one, you don't need one. That said, I am a fan of shooting, and understand why in America you would own a gun for a variety of reasons. In Australia, I have none of those reasons other than it being fun, which is not enough to go through all the paperwork it takes over here. I already said a buyback wouldn't work, why do reply like that is a criticism of what I said?
I also said I was not directly replying to you alone, I was addressing everyone who was making universal statements about the value of guns in self defence, on both side of the argument.