>>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?
>
>And I'll never understand the pro-gun side. The purpose of guns is to kill living things. Having them around is an invitation for people and animals to be killed or hurt.


Not all killing is bad.
If somebody killed Cho after he shot before he murdered 32 people would that have been a bad thing?


>
>As for personal safety, I do the appropriate things to keep myself and my family safe. To date, the worst crime I've had to personally deal with was the theft of my husband's car from the street in front of our house.

Majority of us are fortunate. We've never been violantly violated. But there are many that have been and probably wished, at the time, that someone with a gun would have rescued them.

I've never lived in poverty, so poverty don't exist?