This thread will probably end up closed...
... but I'll throw in my 2 cents anyways.
I'm a Canadian citizen, I was born and I have lived here uninterruptedly for 22 years.
I wholeheartedly believe that ordinary citizens should be allowed to own and carry firearms for the purpose of self-protection, and I stand by those Americans who choose to exercise their right to do so, even though I don't have those same rights.
Why do I take such a stand in a country where I supposedly don't have to worry about crime or terrorism?
I believe in the autonomy of my own life. It's my choice whether or not I am prudent or I take risks in my everyday activities, and my personal well-being is ultimately my responsibility. I have dreams, a future, loved ones, and personal belongings that all constitute important aspects of my life. I, like the vast majority of other people, do not choose to throw away our lives or do stupid things when we feel the need to have fun or out of despair when we are overcome by stress.
I'm not about to allow my dreams to be taken away from me unjustly, remote as that possibility may be. My dreams are dependent on my life, and this is the only life I have.
The probability of me becoming a victim means nothing; the government can keep on telling me that violent crime is going down, but I still hear and know women who have been sexually assaulted, personally know people whose homes have been broken into, and have been a victim of property crime. You can say it happens to 1 out of a million people, but someone still wins the lottery. It could be me.
If someone decides to show no absolutely no respect to my property, how can I trust him to show any respect to my life? If he decides to take my TV, fine. But if he decides to come back to take my life, do I have to ask him to wait for me to dial 911, wait for the police to arrive, and plead with him not to kill me so he won't have any witnesses?
The ordinary citizen isn't by definition required to be a sheep to every single force of nature, government, or crime. The ordinary citizen has his or her own dreams, property, and family to care about. It's their responsibility to protect what's theirs to the fullest extent of the law.
The ordinary citizen deserves to have at his disposal the most effective means of defending him or herself. In our world, that means is a firearm, and consequently deadly force. He or she deserves every right to use as much force as neccessary on that person whom decides to violate the social contract and present themselves as a threat to that person who is defending themselves. No philosopher has ever claimed self-defense to be a violation of morality.
You might argue that the vast majority of people are not qualified to own guns. My own personal ability and responsibility of owning firearms is not for you to decide upon; the vast majority of those whom own firearms are not the ignorant, racist, bigoted, or criminal types that television so indiscriminately portrays them as. We are ordinary people who have taken responsibility to protect ourselves in the event that law enforcement can't. We are students, doctors, chefs, lawyers, shopkeepers, welders, and members of almost any other profession you can imagine. We refuse to be held responsible for the actions of the few, as almost every aspect of human technology stands to be destroyed should we follow this rationale; cars cause accidents and kill people, computer viruses cause massive chaos, and electricty electrocutes, yet we don't attempt to blame and ban any of these technologies over the loss of human life, even when those using these technologies may have specific intent on using them for the purpose of causing harm to others. If you examine statistics, you will find that automobile ownership is a far more life-threatening aspect of society than firearms ownership; the fact is, most gun owners are not the types of people you might assume them to be from watching television. Cars have a purpose: to transport people and goods. Guns have a purpose: to protect human life and property.
If you don't want to own a firearm for the purposes of self-defense, it is your complete and unalienable right to do so. No one in the government will persecute you for that decision, but the criminal who does is under no obligation to practice such civility.
From a statistical point of view, an armed citizenry makes sense. It has been proven that it is not the punishment of a crime that deters criminal behavior, but the certainty and speed with which that criminal is caught following the comission of a criminal act. Even if we decided to put everyone who was caught for even the most minor offense on death row, we would not deter crime if those who committed crimes thought they would escape capture. By allowing the ordinary citizen to be armed, we dramatically increase the risk of certainty and speed with which this criminal will be punished for his behavior, and thus provide real and tangible deterrence to future criminal acts.
Again, I own guns not because I have visions of going out and shooting schoolchildren or robbing banks, or shooting shoplifters or drug users. I am not so stupid as to attach meaningful importance to trivial things like someone stealing a few quarters out of my piggybank, or even someone walking out of my house with my television set. The vast majority of gun owners aren't.
But if someone decides my life isn't important, then I will use whatever means neccessary to protect myself. My body is my temple; everything in my life depends on my well-being, my safety, and my ability to protect that which is important to me, and to continue living to achieve these goals in my life. No one should be allowed to take that from me, and it is my responsibility to defend against this, whether or not the odds of such incidents happening to me are miniscule or not, and especially if the good men and women of law enforcement cannot do so in time, a sad truth of today's world.
