>If you compare homicide figures from different countries and don't believe gun control is protecting society from these incidents, you must either be a complete idiot or born without a head.
>
>Its far more a kind of wishfull thinking that your gun increases your safety. the fact is that esspecially when children can have access (and don't come up with the classic answer that guns should be stored safely out of reach from children? How on earth is it going to protect you then) your gun is more of a threat to safety than it helps.
>
>IMO, it is unbelievable ignorance.
>
>Walter, I believe a few weeks ago you tried to lump John Harvey's statements (which you partly misinterpreted) as ugly Americanism. Your comments are a good example of the very thing you criticized him for.
>
>Here's the bottom line...you can say what you want from across the waters. But the minute anyone takes action to prevent Americans from exercising their 2nd amendment right (which, by the way, is rooted in British historical law) to bear arms for the purpose of defending themselves, they'll have a fight on their hands.
>
>Also - it took me about 2 seconds to find a news story about a family that used a gun to defend themselves.
>http://www.learnaboutguns.com/2010/01/10/houston-tx-home-invader-shot-in-self-defense/

For every such story there are multide of other cases where the gun in the house is (mis)used to kill innocent people. Much often by accident. So this story does not fly with me, and I don't understand why americans don't see that. BTW, the URL of that link says enough by itself. The question I keep asking myself: Why do americans believe in this crap? Is it that difficult to see that the gun is the sledgehammer to drive a screw in and you more likely to hurt your fingers or toes than actually get that screw in.

Its a given fact that gun related homicide rates are way and way higher than everywhere else in the western world. Do you care to explain?

Defending your home and family against crimes can be done in lots of ways which are much more effective. One of them is to make sure you've got decent locks and an possible introder must be dead serious to get into house. We have rules up here that every new house has to be 'intruder proof' for about 5 or so. The introder has to use serious tools to get in. That will leave enough time to call the police or at the worst take that baseball bat instead.

I can understand that it can be fun to own a gun and do shooting excersizes, and that americans do regard gun control as conlicting with 'freedom' (if that even exists) and are holding on to their rights. Yes I can understand. But this has absolutely nothing to do with safety. The word safety is just an excuse and nothing more.

Up here, though we have our crimes and bad neighbourhoods, there is no-one calling for legalizing guns. Quite the opposite. Everyone cathed without (a difficult to get) licence with a gun, has a problem. So gun related crimerates are low. Most of the times, its either criminals killing eachother, or a depressed professional (police, military) killing his wife and family.









>Walter, yes or no....in this case, do you oppose that family's right to own a weapon for the SOLE purpose of defending themselves? Yes or no?
>
>No country can ever make any guarantee that a violent criminal will never break into their house - and so people have the right to defend themselves.