People with guns are more likely to get killed than people who are unarmed.

OK, lets looks at the facts. At least, the facts available despite the NRA's diligent shutting down of as much research into the role of guns in American society as possible.

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2013/01/pro-gun-myths-fa... • A Philadelphia study found that the odds of an assault victim being shot were 4.5 times greater if he carried a gun. His odds of being killed were 4.2 times greater.

Although Myth I also refer to you to: #7: Guns make women safer.

The vast, vast majority of the "research" posted in that post is anecdotal and irrelevant. Just because assault "victims" (did they control for gang-related violence? for obvious malicious intent? etc) had a higher rate of being shot doesn't mean guns are useless.

Same with the "fact" that guns in the home are linked to suicides and assaults and not legitimate home defense. OK? Yeah, that's obvious. But that doesn't control for the fact that many people who purchase guns use them completely responsibly.

I understand you think it's a bad idea that on average, gun crime happens. But none of the "evidence" you posted presents a slam-dunk case for repealing the 2nd Amendment and probably many others (unreasonable search and seizure and the like).

None of this even factors into the whole intent of allowing citizens to own weapons, which is worth a fair amount.

I learned long ago that 90% of motherjones articles are trash. They are the online liberal equivalent of FOX news.

While firearms do provide a means of self-defense, there is also data which suggests there's an association between less firearm laws and higher firearm fatalities:

http://archinte.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=16613...

Home defense makes no sense unless you believe that if someone steal your TV it's ok that you potentially kill him/her for tresspassing.

The safest defense is to not have this turn into an arms race. Both for you and your children.