If anything, that statistic (roughly one per person) doesn't inspire confidence. The correct takeaway isn't "wow, so few of the guns in America are used to kill people." It's "wow, there are so many guns that anybody can have one, regardless of whether they are fit to."

We don't tell people if they have the right to reproduce, and we shouldn't tell people if they have the right to protect themselves.

Your insistence on a right to a gun for self-protection comes at the cost of others using their right to a gun for crime.

If nobody had guns, you wouldn't need to a gun to protect yourself from someone else with a gun.

The problem of course is that the genie is already out of the bottle. We can't take the guns away, they're all over the place in the USA already. Even if the Second Amendment was repealed, all that would happen is that only criminals would have guns.

We're fucked and there's no solution.

Yes, you still need a gun even if the criminal only has a knife or a baseball bat. You will not win with someone with those tools. And no woman will win even if she has the same knife or bat. So yes, women need guns.

This made me laugh pretty good, but it's been my opinion for a long time.

> The correct takeaway

This is objectively false. You're attempting to portray a personal opinion as fact. Bad form, and definitely not appropriate for HN. Please don't do that here.

It's a rhetorical device that I'll continue to use here and wherever else I post, but thanks for your concern :)

You need to review the guidelines: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html