It's very much tied up by a series of 'what ifs' on both sides:
- 'What if someone tries to murder me and my family?'
- 'What if someone is mentally ill?'
- 'What if a kid gets their hands on a gun?'
- 'What if the government becomes tyrannical and the peasantry need to rise up?'
- 'What if the US experienced a land invasion from a foreign power and the US military couldn't cope?'
- 'What if all the petty criminals still had guns and the police didn't effectively restrict the supply?'
It becomes very abstract when every single one of these 'what ifs' are extremely unlikely in an individual person's day-to-day existence. But on a grander scale, certain occurrences are much more likely than others - (eg. A mentally ill person or a child getting their hands on a gun is likely to happen on a semi-regular basis in a large country with an abundance of firearms).
You can pull stats on successful defensive uses of firearms and try to crunch some numbers regarding people murdered by guns and whether owning a gun makes you more or less likely to die in a home invasion, again the stats may not mean much to an individual person as there are so many variables in any given confrontation (and everyone likes to imagine that they're special and would absolutely win a firefight no matter the context or statistical likelihood). But when setting laws or determining the level of control, stats absolutely matter.
But what is ultimately more subjective is the personal risk-taking. If someone points a gun at you do you think 'I'm dead already, YOLO!' and try to reach for your own gun? It could feasibly work out for you in individual cases. Or do you think 'I stand a better chance of surviving if i'm unarmed/they think i'm unarmed' in a given situation? Or are you never going to be in a situation where someone has their gun on you without first having your own gun out? In that case do you whip your gun out every time you see anyone approach you? How long would you live doing that?
There are no reliable stats. To my knowledge no one has scientifically tabulated the data necessary.
Don't you think that muggings, home invasions, spousal abuse/attempted murder also happen on a semi regular basis in a large country?
During a home invasion, street mugging, mass shooting, or other potentially violent encounter the unarmed person has placed his fate COMPLETELY in the hands of the perpetrator. Quite a few people are unwilling to place themselves in that situation.
Being armed in public requires an attitude that is difficult for many people to assume. Many people assume that once they are carrying a weapon they need fear no one and not have to take any shit. Quite the opposite is true. A person carrying a concealed weapon must be the most humble of persons. No rude hand gestures to other drivers, insults, which if unarmed would result in fisticuffs, must be ignored. Confrontation assiduously avoided. The use of a firearm to protect your life or that of your family is deadly serious and the threat to you must be deadly serious as well.
Heskey, you like to frame everything in black and white when in reality everything is situational. If you are in a public place such as a theater or mall and a madman is methodically shooting people, if you are armed you'd better either flee or open fire on him because it relatively clear what is going to happen. If you encounter a thug aiming a gun at you, I'd say you'd be better off trying to give him what he wants because your draw won't ever beat his trigger finger. Being armed is not a talisman that wards off all evil magically. It will not solve every possible encounter.
Poll