I’m raising money for Rich Paul, freedom activist. Earlier today, in response to my post on facebook linking to this fundraiser, a man named Jason commented that he believed Rich to be in the wrong because he broke the law. Specifically, he held up a camera monopod in a defensive posture when approached by a gang of violent thugs. The thugs injured one of Rich’s friends that night. No one had a firearm.
Jason postulated that if everyone were armed, there would have been a deadly shootout. I responded thusly:
If you’re interested in the relationship between firearms and violence, I recommend the book, “More Guns, Less Crime.” Turns out people are less likely to turn to violence when more people are armed.
If Rich Paul were armed, as he normally is, no one would be coming over to aggress against him. And if *everyone* were armed, the mutually assured destruction dictates that no one draws his weapon. Ever heard the expression, “An armed society is a polite society”?
Don’t believe me or invent hypotheticals. There’s already real data to examine. The most armed societies are also the least violent. It’s initially counter-intuitive, sure. But so are lots of things that are borne out by evidence: The idea that the earth is round is counter-intuitive to those who look around and see flat land. The fact is, more guns means less crime. http://www.amazon.com/More-Guns-Less-Crime…/dp/0226493660