Gun Rights in all locations should be legalized.

Here's your list of arguments for no gun control: People need a form of self defense. So you need self defense. Are you really going to carry a gun around with you wherever you go? Are you really expecting to be robbed at any moment? Guns are bulky, useless to carry around. Knives are more practical. At this point, you'll realize that having a gun in public is really only good for one thing; and that's if you are anticipating using it. Therefore, allowing guns in public only enables criminals. Long story short, guns in public = criminal activity 9 times out of 10. Ok, so allowing guns is more useful for having at home, ready for a robbery. This makes more sense, but there are still problems. Stats show that introducing a gun into the home is more likely to make it more dangerous, not more safe. --- In Jackman's experiment, where boys aged 8-12 were placed in a room with 1 hidden gun, and 2 hidden water pistols, 1/3 of all the groups had pulled the trigger of the real one. These kids are not young, or stupid. --- Any time a gun at a human, that human is 80% more likely to be the person holding the gun, than anybody else. If you want a safer home, then it's been shown statistically that you should NOT have a gun in it. Ok, so let's say you are a responsible gun owner, you lock your gun in a safe. This is the bare minimum I would accept of somebody with a family. THEN IT'S NOT PROTECTING YOU. The gun is useless in the safe unless you can open it in time... But if someone is coming to kill you, the chances of this are nil. Now finally, what are you protecting yourself from? Nobody is coming to kill you. If someone is robbing you, even if you have a gun, I would recommend just giving them the money. You don't need to risk your life over something like a robbery. If someone breaks into your house, they want your TV, not to gun your family down. Just call the police, they should be there quicker than the assailant can leave. Once again, you are risking your life trying to combat the robber. Now finally, I want to talk about an armed society. Why do you think this is a good idea? Untrained people carrying guns everywhere? All paranoid they will need them? I don't know why you think this will lower the crime rate, when the crime rate should obviously rise. "What you should think about is this question: If we ban guns, how will citizens have protection?" Again, what are you protecting yourself from? Are you really paranoid you'll always be robbed? Even if this is the case, the police force is there for a reason. If someone is robbing you, just give them what they want. 999/1000 times you will not get hurt. I would rather give the money than risk my life being a hero. Ask yourself a different question. If everybody has guns, what's stopping them from using them for reasons you would not find acceptable? Statistics are not useless, they are very useful. According to http://www.numbeo.com..., Canada is notably safer to live in than the states, for ANY crime. I imagine if it was homicide specific, this would go down even further. Australia is even further down the list for crime rate, and they are an exemplary example of gun control. In general, Neither Canada or Australia suffers massacres AT ALL. There are rare occasions, for example, Australia has had one massacre since the gun ban over 15 years ago. The US has AT LEAST ONE YEARLY. The stats are in heavy favor that you are safer if nobody has guns. "And also, you do understand that if guns become illegal, criminals will still have access to guns. If the gun they possess is legal, they can always get another one through the black market." --- At several times the price (Did you really think the black market was cost efficient?) Nobody will pay tens of thousands for a gun unless they are an organized crime syndicate, and they will just import their guns. Guns are one of the worst things you can sell on the black market, since nobody depends on them. Anyway, gun CONTROL also focuses on getting rid of these guns as well. "Do you think a suicidal person would not kill themselves just because they did not have access to a gun?" No, but that is the wrong question. It doesn't consider the important factors. Let me ask you the correct question: --- Do you think that if a person contemplating suicide owned a gun, they would be more likely to follow through than those who do not own one? "There would be no gap in the amount of suicides if we were to take guns away." This is a logical fallacy. You've shown that suicide is still possible without guns, but you've made no comment on the suicide rate based on gun ownership. According to http://www.worldlifeexpectancy.com... Canada has a lower sucide rate than the US, and Austrailia is FAR lower than both Canada and the US. Of course, this does not necessarily prove my point, because a lot of factors cause suicide. However, I do propose that a country with more guns has a tendency towards higher suicide rate. Good gun control can exist, and I believe it's an undeniable and obvious fact that a country that has NO guns is safer than one where EVERYONE has them.