The pro gun argument can't stem from an evaluation of overall safety. It's ludicrous. On a macro level, the widespread availability of guns in the US leads to significantly more gun violence.
It has to stem from a fundamental right to defend yourself. The argument has to be that, even if gun availability increases the rate of gun violence nationwide, an individual has a fundamental right to protect himself and his family, and ownership of a gun is a logical and reasonably necessary extension of that right.
There's no reasonable argument for a lot of the more advanced weaponry available to citizens. It's the product of a well-funded lobby and a deification of the Founding Fathers. There is no fundamental right to shoot a hundred rounds per minute and own enough ammunition to decimate small towns.
|