There should be no controls on private trade and use of small arms

On the preamble : I'm not even going to address that. Contention 1 : what has proved this untrue ? The average response time as reported by the city of mineapolis is over 8 minutes. This shows that the government cannot adequately protect average people. In the span of eight minutes, a criminal can easily choke you to death, douse you in gasoline, set you on fire, run 12 city blocks away, and secure a hiding place. Most violent crimes occur between the time the victim becomes aware of them and the time the police arrive ( if they do. ) The products you mention like tazers and pepper spray are not adequate to diffuse most serious criminal situations. In the most recent L.A. riots, the vietnamese neighbourhood was the only neighborhood untouched by mob violence. Why ? Because the Vietnamese people all had people who stood on the roof with a shotguns. Non-lethal or less-than-lethal weapons are not enough to deter or stop determined criminals, guns are often not enough to stop criminals, especially people hopped up on mind-altering drugs. The common man ( who is law-abiding ) must have equal defense to the criminal class and / or the government so the criminal class / government cannot take advantage of them thru force. Government has never had a monopoly on force, it does not have a monopoly on force, and furthermore it shouldn't ever have a monopoly on force. Guns are one of the great equalizers and for a society to recognize equality it must recognize everyone has equal rights to protect their person. Law enforcement cannot and often will not protect everyone. Look at the aftermath of hurricane katrina, where FEMA not only failed to protect the people of new orleans, but actively blocked existing local emergency response and mowed down crowds of people with machineguns who were attempting to leave the area. Also, I never assumed every man or woman would want to carry a firearm or use or own or train with one. Never. Your assertion that we would see a rise of vigilantism is absurd. Most people who want to own a firearm in the u.s. today already own one, or several. Rule of law means equality under the law and that means everyone has the same right to bear arms. The u.s. justice department's statistics show that guns are used to prevent more violent crimes in america than they are used to commit. from http://www.justfacts.com... : * Based on survey data from the U.S. Department of Justice, roughly 5,340,000 violent crimes were committed in the United States during 2008. These include simple/aggravated assaults, robberies, sexual assaults, rapes, and murders.[13] [14] [15] Of these, about 436,000 or 8% were committed by offenders visibly armed with a gun.[16] * Based on survey data from a 2000 study published in the Journal of Quantitative Criminology,[17] U.S. civilians use guns to defend themselves and others from crime at least 989,883 times per year.[18] In switzerland, where the gun ownership rate per household is higher than any other country in the world, incidence of violent crime is lower than any other developed country, excluding smaller countries populated by less than 100,00 people. from http://en.wikipedia.org... : Gun politics in Switzerland are unique in Europe. The personal weapon of militia is kept at home as part of the military obligations. Switzerland has one of the highest militia gun ownership rates in the world.[1] In recent times political opposition has expressed a desire for tighter gun regulations.[2] A referendum in February 2011 rejected stricter gun control.[3] the city of kennesaw, georgia passed a law mandating firearm ownership by all eligible households, and their rate of violent crime is lower than surrounding counties, and well below the national average from : http://en.wikipedia.org... In 1982 the city passed an ordinance [Sec 34-21][13] (a) In order to provide for the emergency management of the city, and further in order to provide for and protect the safety, security and general welfare of the city and its inhabitants, every head of household residing in the city limits is required to maintain a firearm, together with ammunition therefore. (b) Exempt from the effect of this section are those heads of households who suffer a physical or mental disability which would prohibit them from using such a firearm. Further exempt from the effect of this section are those heads of households who are paupers or who conscientiously oppose maintaining firearms as a result of beliefs or religious doctrine, or persons convicted of a felony. unt from ziss vee can conclude that gun culture, citizen ownership of firearms, and free access to guns does not necessarily result in increased crime, and serves to protect the rule of law. Contention 2 : Domestically, guns are used to prevent more crime than commit it, as demonstrated in my rebuttal to contention 1. It is true that the numbers for gun killing go up if you factor in war, but factoring in war is intellectually dishonest because we aren't talking about military defence. Guns are often the only thing that prevents mass slaughter using guns from occuring, just as civillians can defend themselves from aggressors on the street, and well-armed militia can defend themselves from governments and other groups seeking to kill large numbers of people. " Gun control ", gun control, and confiscation of arms have immediately preceded most of the mass killing of the last five centuries. Ex. : Soviet Russia, Maoist China, Nazi Germany passing gun control laws nearly identical to modern American gun control laws, etc. To quote thomas jefferson : "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms. The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government" -- Thomas Jefferson, 1 Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 "The very atmosphere of firearms anywhere and everywhere restrains evil interference - they deserve a place of honor with all that's good" -- George Washington "The best we can hope for concerning the people at large is that they be properly armed." -- Alexander Hamilton, The Federalist Papers at 184-188 "Among the many misdeeds of the British rule in India, history will look upon the act of depriving a whole nation of arms, as the blackest." -- Mahatma Gandhi "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." -- Benjamin Franklin, Historical Review of Pennsylvania, 1759. "Experience should teach us to be most on our guard to protect liberty when the government's purposes are beneficient... The greatest dangers to liberty lurk in insidious encroachment by men of zeal, well meaning but without understanding." -- Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis "Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice. Tolerance in the face of tyranny is no virtue." -- Barry Goldwater "I hold it, that a little rebellion, now and then, is a good thing, and as necessary in the political world as storms in the physical." -- Thomas Jefferson, Letter to James Madison, January 30, 1787 woops, looks like some other great quotes about guns sneaked in there. He also said that government should fear their people and that it signifies Liberty, the reverse being Tyranny. If the V - tech, columbine, or countless self-shooters could not have used guns, they would have used other weapons. All banning guns does is put them exclusively in the hands of criminals. You cannot eliminate arms by banning them. The only reason the gun-free scenarios ( barring government enforcers ) you mentioned did not involve violence was that it did not come to the point where one group was willing to fight the other. con 3 : No guns as punishment for crime is acceptable. I should have been more clear. aaand con 4 : Your argument is false in unnature, ppl have a right to defense, not to violent crime. :)