Gun Control Laws Conflict with Data about Gun Owners & Crime | National Review:
"Liberals imagine that law-abiding citizens do not have any idea how to use a gun responsibly — and that criminals will start following rules.
Sometimes someone inadvertently performs a public service by bringing an unbelievably stupid and dangerous idea to the surface, where it can be exposed for what it is.
The New York Times can be credited — if that is the word — with performing this public service in a recent editorial against proposals to allow law-abiding citizens to carry concealed guns.
They refer to what they call the National Rifle Association’s “fantasy that citizens can stand up to gunmen by shooting it out.”
Nobody has suggested any such thing.
Data collected over many years — but almost never seeing the light of day in the New York Times or the rest of the mainstream media — show many thousands of examples of people defending themselves with a gun each year, without having to pull the trigger.
If someone comes at you with a knife and you pull out a gun, chances are they will stop.
The only time I ever pointed a gun at a human being, it was when someone was sneaking up toward me from behind a shed in the middle of the night.
I never fired a shot. I just pointed the gun at him and told him to stop.
Actually having to shoot someone is the exception, not the rule.
Yet the New York Times conjures up a vision of something like the gunfight at the O.K. Corral. Concealed guns protect not only those who carry them but also those who do not.
If concealed guns become widespread, then a mugger or a carjacker has no way of knowing who has one and who does not.
It makes being a mugger or a carjacker a less safe occupation.
Gun-control laws are in effect occupational-safety laws — OSHA for burglars, muggers, carjackers, and others.
The fatal fallacy of gun-control laws in general is the assumption that such laws actually control guns..."