“The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun” NRA Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre.
Oh dear. What has happened to logic? Why is the above statement from LaPierre true and the following statement false: The only thing that stops a good guy with a gun is a bad guy with a gun?
The fact is, neither of the statements are true in and of themselves. Whether the guy with a gun is good or bad is no predictor of the outcome of a gun duel. I am no gun expert but I would expect that, all things being equal with fire-power, aim, expertise, etc., the guy who gets in the first shot will stop the other guy most of the time, regardless of who is good and who is bad. Of course, all things being equal seldom applies, anyway.
About twenty years ago or more my wife and I were discussing a South African statistic that went along the lines that the most likely victims of gun violence were the owner of the gun or close family members of the gun owner, and that gun owners or their families were more likely to be killed or receive gunshot wounds than the general population. That confirmed our decision never to own a gun or to have one in our home. My impression from stories of gun violence here in Canada and elsewhere is that this still seems to hold true.
I like what Republican Senator Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) said in response to the suggestion from LaPierre that armed guards should be put in schools. “It’s fixing the wrong problem, because the problem is cultural,” he told reporters on Capitol Hill.
Even that is decidedly simplistic but it is heading in the right direction. Mental health has to be another huge factor in the equation. I don't know what the answer is but anybody who fastens on just one, simplistic solution is surely being simple-minded.
