Does the hypocrisy of the Anti-Gun crowd make you wonder if they’re actually capable of rational thought? For example, have you ever heard them say, “Nobody needs an AR-15,” or “Nobody needs a gun in their home,” or “Nobody needs to carry a gun in public?”
RELATED NEWS: Nobody Needs An AR-15? These Folks Did
The implication is that if you don’t “need” a gun, you shouldn’t have one. As if they were the ones to grant you your God given right, based on “their” interpretation of need.
The Anti-Gunners say these things to sway public opinion and make gun-ownership look unreasonable. But let’s look at some numbers and talk about the “need” to own a gun.
Now we all know that the Founders didn’t call the Constitutional Amendments, the “Bill of Needs” and although we know that gun-ownership is our right, there may be a significant argument to be made for the need to carry a gun. In our home, at the grocery store or anywhere else for that matter.
RELATED NEWS: Texans Who Carry Have A Lower Murder Rate Than Brits
According to a study by Gary Kleck with confirming data from the CDC, there are approximately two point five million defensive gun uses in America every year. That means two point five million lives saved because people had guns in their possession when they were attacked. Forty-six percent of those were women. That doesn’t necessarily mean Good Guys killing Bad Guys. It most often meant the mere presence of a gun deterred an attacker. In other words, “The attacker knew his potential victim had a gun, and chose not to attack.”
There are just over three hundred million people in America. There are just over one million successful violent crimes in America per year according to FBI data. Three hundred million people and one million attacks. That's a one in three hundred chance that you'll be the victim of one of those attacks. I don't know about you, but I don't like those odds. The Anti-Gunners will tell you, it'll never happen to them, yet many of these same people will buy lottery tickets with a one in twenty million chance of winning because, “You gotta be in it to win it.” There's the hypocrisy.
Twice as many violent attacks are prevented than carried out, because the victim had a gun.
What would the result be if more people were denied their right to carry a gun?
What would the result be if more people exercised their right to carry?
RELATED NEWS: 10 Mass Shootings That Were Stopped By Armed Citizens
Many of these Anti-Gunners will tell you that their odds of being attacked are far less likely because they don't live in the bad part of town, yet they govern those parts of town through the politicians they vote for.
The thing the Anti-Gunners ignore is, if their odds of being the victim in a violent attack go down, someone else's odds have to go up because the number of people didn't change and the number of yearly attacks didn't change. They'll tell you that we need more gun-restrictions while watching innocent people die in high crime areas and gun free zones. There's more of their hypocrisy.
RELATED NEWS: Hashtags Don't Stop Rapists. Hollow-Points Do
Rather than admit to the world that gun-ownership is a right and also a need, the gun-grabbers pretend they have no blood on their hands while using the death-toll numbers from high crime areas to push for more gun-control.
They stand on the graves of those they have put in harm's way and they use anti-gun propaganda to fool people who aren't paying attention, into believing that they care. Human-violence in America is not an argument for more gun-restrictions, it's an argument for more armed-preparedness and firearms training.
The Second Amendment is not a privilege. It's your right.
Dan Wos is a nationally recognized 2nd Amendment advocate as well as the author of Good Gun Bad Guy and Good Gun Bad Guy 2. Go behind the lies of the anti-gun radicals and find out what they hoped you would never know.