That is simply not true. There is no need for concealed carry in France nor UK, for example.

Even the Wikipedia article on the topic lists numerous scientific studies showing that the effectiveness of concealed carry varies in place and time, and that there is almost no link between concealed carry and lower crime rates : https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Concealed_carry_in_the_Unite...

Northern Ireland is part of the UK, and the government currently grants licenses to carry a concealed handgun there despite having highly restrictive laws elsewhere in the country. I highly doubt this would be the case if there wasn't a strong recognized need.

Tell that to the poor souls at Charlie Hebdo.

Homicide rates are publicly available per country by the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime.

The homicide rate for USA is 5 per 100 000 hab in 2018. For France, it is 1.2

You are 3 times more likely to die in USA than in France from an homicide

Once again, tell that to those poor souls.

Even if I believed your numbers, this does not take away your right to self defense from a robber or tyrant.

I'll offer a counter-example to your claim that CCW is needed every single place on earth: my home.

I don't have a gun. If someone comes in to my home with a gun, even if they are a "good guy", the odds of my dying by gunshot would instantly go up by a large multiple.

In comparison, the odds that I'm going to suffer a home invasion, that I would have been shot without the friendly gun owner, and that person successfully prevents it is vanishingly small.

I realize that not everybody lives where that calculation comes out that way, but to claim it CCW makes sense everywhere is unsupportable.

You are free to defend yourself (or not!) however you please!

Ultimately - that's okay, so long as my rights and the safety of my family aren't subject to another's particular distaste for self-preservation.

> another's particular distaste for self-preservation.

15155, I'm sure you are a smart person, but stop for a second and really inspect what you have done here. It is obvious to me you are not making a reasoned argument, but an emotional one, but think it is reasoned.

I spelled out clearly a situation where someone entering my home with a gun increases my chance of injury or death. Your retort is to claim I have a distaste for self-preservation. You didn't apparently think about what my claim was or counter with an argument why my logical deduction was wrong, but instead just assumed I don't want to avoid death or injury.

So let me break it down. I live in a safe neighborhood. I don't have a gun. If you, a good guy with a gun, entered my home at my invitation, did my chances of injury or death just go up or down? I'm not claiming it is a significant chance, just that it a large multiple of an already minuscule probability.