Just like your example of "owning" a gun makes you less safe, being in a place that is inherently "less safe" doesn't mean you are safe because you are "fit", "youngish", and "street smart". Or are you contradicting yourself now? You see, what you pointed out is the variable of humans themselves. Which is really the only variable at all.
I do not know what your question is. There are things you can do to make your life safer. One of them is to eat better. Another is to wear your seatbelt. Owning a gun is not one of them. I want a gun. I have discussed it here at length and my pal red has given me advice. I don't think it makes me safer. It's fun. The woman in the news owned a gun, was very safe and well trained, practiced at the range. Her son killed her with it, then a bunch of other folks. She was far less safe. Guns are dangerous and if I want to be safer I avoid them.
I never once stated having a gun makes you safer. It is only a tool. I only dispute it makes you "less safe".
Perhaps. But he is more dangerous As a trained shooter, which he was. I am not arguing for gun control. I am saying that if you want to maximize your own safety, and I do not want that, then you shouldn't own a gun, they are dangerous.
Still proves nothing. A gun near to me stationary has nothing to do with a gun brought to me. There were ZERO guns stationed at that school.
Is an armed man more dangerous than an unarmed man? No shit. Is an armed man less safe than an unarmed man? State your case.
