I don't need to lock my doors where I live and I certainly don't live in fear. If all the world was like where I live guns would serve no purpose. Most Americans and Canadians probably live this way. We have at least a statistical illusion of safety. (Virginia Tech is absolutely bucolic) But there are places in the US and Canada ( and a lot of the rest of the world ) where I would not feel safe in my own home.

But the point is not one's personal security evaluation - that's risk assessment - you make your own choices and live with the consequences. But as to social policy, what reason do you have to believe that any kind of gun ban has an impact on those who want to use guns for criminal purposes. To you think violent criminals ( not thieves, but armed robbers ) in Toronto or Quebec or Ottawa don't have all the guns they want or feel they need? How about in Britain?
Don't you think they are comforted by the idea that their victims don't?


>>I really don't understand this entire antigun thing here. I'm pretty sure I never will either. I grew up around guns and I've observed their use with deadly concequences as well. I agree that only those trained to use a weapon should have one, however, criminals will have them no matter what. The training is really to protect law abiding citizens from themselves. So are the gun laws. I guess there is no crime in other countries so they don't have to worry about the things that go bump in the night when their wives are home alone? They would rather the worst happen than for their wife to take out an intruder? I'm sorry, but if it came down to my daughter's life or the intruder's, no hesitation. I will admit that I prefer my daughter have a taser, but she will have a weapon. The first warning on a taser is Can temporarily incapacitate target. That's the idea isn't it?
>
>
>>I really don't understand this entire antigun thing here. I'm pretty sure I never will either. I grew up around guns and I've observed their use with deadly concequences as well. I agree that only those trained to use a weapon should have one, however, criminals will have them no matter what. The training is really to protect law abiding citizens from themselves. So are the gun laws. I guess there is no crime in other countries so they don't have to worry about the things that go bump in the night when their wives are home alone? They would rather the worst happen than for their wife to take out an intruder? I'm sorry, but if it came down to my daughter's life or the intruder's, no hesitation. I will admit that I prefer my daughter have a taser, but she will have a weapon. The first warning on a taser is Can temporarily incapacitate target. That's the idea isn't it?
>>
>
>as you say there is a completely different mindset in the USA (and Alberta) to the rest of the world and the two really don't understand each other and can't have a meaningful discussion.
>
>We just don't have that seige mentality. I don't lock my doors when i'm home and forget much of the time when i go out.
>
>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xieOPvWLji4&mode=related&search=
>
>The best way for me to protect my family is to fight for a complete ban on gun ownership.
>
>I only remember ever knowing one person who's been burgled. Ironically he was the only gun owner i've ever (knowingly) known and wasn't home at the time.
>
>These numbers are off the top of my head but as i remember it during the worst of the "troubles" in Northern Ireland between say 1969 and 1999 , where we had what many considered a civil war, there were approx 4,000 murders. Philadelphia has a roughly similar population (1.5 million) as N.I. and had a murder rate of approx 400 per year during that same period (= 12,000 murders).
>
>One of my greatest thrills was approaching a gorilla in the wild, to within 2 feet, and taking a photograph. In fact i'd recommend that to everyone ; next time you go hunting take a camera instead.
>
>I've visited between 40 and 50 countries. Being in the USA scares me most.
>
>
>n

xieOPvWLji4