Guns in Public, and Out of Sight

[Atypical Liberal]

69. So we are back again to this:

What I am saying is that Judo techniques are more efficient, not effective. Judo effects the preferred result. Stopping and subduing an assailant without injury. I'm not an expert, but I've used those techniques many times with success, including disarming an adversary. Handguns are crude and carrying them for self-defense is way over the top.

Personally, If I was confronted with an armed attacker, I would be all for "over the top". I would not interested in seeing how little force is required to stop the attack on my life. You may think that handguns are "crude" and not as "efficient" as Judo (though I have to wonder how killing your attacker in seconds with a flick of the finger cannot be considered to be "efficient" ), but when your life is on the line, your best choice is the one that is the most effective.

That's why police officers carry firearms.

But all of that is academic. The bottom line is any kind of physical resistance against a violent attack is just that - physical resistance, and it requires the victim to be stronger and/or better trained than their attacker in order to succeed. This is an unrealistic expectation for most people.

So once again we are back to this:

Without firearms, any victim of violent crime has three choices: flee if they are fast enough, submit if they are tough enough, or engage in a physical contest of strength with their attacker.

Many people just don't have they physical capability to do any of those things. The firearm is an equalizer.