I'm not sure about the U.S.A, but the European authorities are incapable of providing a safe environment in which their respective citizens can live. In this context the arguments against private gun ownership is eclipsed by the right for private citizens to have access to legally certified personal protection weapons,( if so desired) just in the same way the forces of law and order have in countries where the threat of deadly violence exists. If even some of the Parisians who were gunned down by the Muslim filth had possessed firearms the carnage would have been much less. In such situations there are two kinds of people, those who have guns and those who are unarmed and helpless. The case against the private ownership of firearms was sunk without trace in Paris a few days ago. There will be more such atrocities across Europe and unless European citizens have the means with which to protect themselves they will be slaughtered by Muslim murder squads whilst the politicians wring their blood stained hands, spout all the usual meaningless rhetoric and feign sympathy for the victims and their loved ones.

Worse yet is that fact that many people like myself use guns not for protection but to feed our family and save our garden. I enjoy eating healthier food that lives in my back yard and I know what chemicals are in it. I eat t he veggies out of the garden. I have never thought about using a gun on another human but I need a gun to humanely harvest wild life for food. Sure I could use other methods but nothing is more humane that a shot to the head. Why should I be disarmed because evil people use a tool in an evil way. They would still get the job done just in a less humane way.

What kind of mindless people look at a gun as a murdering tool versus seeing it as a means to protect ourselves from evil.

Guns were developed to kill, so it really isn't that ridiculous for them to view guns negatively.

Whenever we see mass shootings, there are two ways to look at the outcome.

You can say guns are bad and we should disarm law abiding citizens, gun free zones, etc.(meaning only evil people will have guns because they laugh at your laws).

Or, you can say we realize there has been and always will be evil people in this world, and is the exact reason why law abiding citizens should have guns to even the playing field and protect ourselves. The police and military(who have the guns) always come after the killing is finished.

There are far more than two ways of looking at the outcome, actually. For example, civilian accuracy is often terrible. A 1998 study from John's Hopkins University showed that for every instance of a gun being used for self defense, there were four unintentional shootings. Considering that, one could say that it could be beneficial for law abiding citizens to have guns, but we need to ensure they are sufficiently trained to use them.

Can you imagine a couple terrorists killing almost 100 people? That would be impossibe if the people in that concert had the right of concealed firearms. It also may have been a deterent for evil to even try such as barbaric act.

Using a tragedy to push hypotheticals is incredibly cynical.

To all the people who hate that America got the atom bomb (because it is only used for killing people), can you imagine if hitler had gotten the bomb first? There would be no America today.

Not true. There would be no Israel today. Not that that is somehow a good outcome or anything obviously.

WEAPONS PROTECT A PEOPLE FROM EVIL!

That is one of the many things they do. The left is absurd when it comes to ignoring the good guns can do, and the right is absurd when it comes to ignoring the bad guns can do (in both cases simply as tools in the hands of people). It is important to recognize both.

It's so obvious to thinking freedom loving people who have no agenda to disarm a nation allowing more control from Government, and allowing terrorists free reign on spreading terror.

Are you claiming you represent "freedom loving people"?

I think you need to stop comparing people's opinions on guns and alcohol. Primarily, many of those with more liberal views, such as myself, have consistent positions: both guns and alcohol should both be legal, but controlled.

What kind of mindless people look at a gun as a murdering tool versus seeing it as a means to protect ourselves from evil.

Probably the way people want to force people how to see it

Whenever we see mass shootings, there are two ways to look at the outcome.

You can say guns are bad and we should disarm law abiding citizens, gun free zones, etc.(meaning only evil people will have guns because they laugh at your laws).

Let me remind you something; the government makes these things!

Or, you can say we realize there has been and always will be evil people in this world, and is the exact reason why law abiding citizens should have guns to even the playing field and protect ourselves. The police and military(who have the guns) always come after the killing is finished.

The police is going to kill first when they stop being "a tad-late."

Can you imagine a couple terrorists killing almost 100 people? That would be impossible if the people in that concert had the right of concealed firearms. It also may have been a deterent for evil to even try such as barbaric act.

Well, the terrorists could always leave the citizens alone and fight the government. Citizens aren't in the way for a long time already! You haven't seen a reverse robbery for a very long time!

To all the people who hate that America got the atom bomb (because it is only used for killing people), can you imagine if hitler had gotten the bomb first? There would be no America today.

Hitler might not use the atom bomb on us, as if they should bomb the people who started the war

WEAPONS PROTECT A PEOPLE FROM EVIL! Bleeding heart Liberals look at weapons as murder weapons rather than a means of protecting good people from evil.

They see it as both depending on how they want to see it, just like i just said.

It's so obvious to thinking freedom loving people who have no agenda to disarm a nation allowing more control from Government, and allowing terrorists free reign on spreading terror.

Terrorists are stealing, not getting allowed.

The argument is invalid. Yes it's terrible that so many people died in Paris. It's a despicable thing for which the world grieves. That being said, France's annual gun death by homicide is about 30 times less than America's. 304 homicides have occurred in Baltimore this year alone. As an American, you are 30 times MORE LIKELY to be a victim of gun violence.

It's NOT false causality to say that because we are most heavily armed, we perpetrate the most violence.

Just because people died in France doesn't mean that this violence is commonplace around the world! Not only is this logically flawed, it perpetuates XENOPHOBIA, and IGNORANCE about how our world really works.

Or maybe, just maybe there's no such thing as evil, good or God and there is simply the fact that a nation without guns will 100% have lower murder rates and success of attempted murder than one with them.

To continue to further the creation and implementation of weapons of mass destruction, including ones such as guns, encourages the use of them within society. It's easy to say that giving guns to law abiding citizens can deter the enemy or protect oneself from danger, but many notorious killers in history have been law abiding citizens up until the point in which suddenly they are not. Ridding of weapons completely, from the hands of everyone except for officers of the city will cut down on violence. The main issue in most acts of violence, was how simple it was for criminal to come into possession of a gun, and by controlling the sale and possession of guns, we as a nation also minimize the overall use of guns as weapons for evil. In cases of school shootings, gang related violence, and armed robbery, the gunmen often get the guns from family members or self purchased, much of which could have been avoided had their been affective control on the sale of guns, with background checks and more restriction on gun licenses. Confusing leftist views of wanting to control guns in the hands of average citizens, and not understanding that guns can be used as protection does not help anything. If a citizen can receive an in depth background check and pass, they can own a gun, simple as that, but violence fought with violence will not lessen the amount of everyday acts of destruction we see.

ok, but your ideas need to explain and predict reality.

explain Germany with it's relatively high gun ownership rate yet unbelievably low gun deaths rate.

explain Japan with it's gun restriction and the number of deaths by firearms.

the only developed country with a gun problem in our world is the US. want to tell me why that is?

also, much of your fear-mongering about protection is crap. sure, in theory it works, but in reality it's been shown by statistics that it doesn't.

and then: