A good guy with a gun will stop a bad guy with a gun.
Short Retort[edit | edit source]
- Who decides who's a "good guy"? What if a bad guy believes he's a good guy?
- Vigilantism results in mayhem, in which the most aggressive people dominate.
Claim Rationale[edit | edit source]
- This claim assumes armed citizens can, and should, be the first line of defense against armed criminals and mass shooters.
Retort Deep-Dive[edit | edit source]
- Who decides who's a "good guy"? The armed guys themselves?
- What if a bad guy believes he's a good guy?
- If you have a gun, how do you know if you're a "good guy", or a "bad guy"?
- Your premise fails when bad guys consider themselves to be the good guys.
- Therefor, some person or entity (other than armed guys themselves) needs to determine who's "good" and "bad". Who should that entity be?
- Shouldn't it be the legal system?
- If "bad guys" obtain their guns legally, then the legal and regulatory system has failed to filter out the bad guys.
- If "bad guys" obtain their guns illegally, then the enforcement has failed.
- Vigilantism, taken to extreme, produces mayhem.
- The goal is to reduce gun violence, not increase it.
- The US has the highest gun ownership rate in the world - an average of 88 guns per 100 people (SOURCES: UNODC & Small arms survey). Therefor, if more guns = less violent crime, then we should have the lowest violent crime rate in the world. We don't.
- The claims made in John Lott's book, “More Guns Less Crime” have been debunked by many researchers. "when extended to new data, does not show evidence that passage of right-to-carry laws reduces crime. No link between right-to-carry laws and changes in crime is apparent in the raw data, even in the initial sample." -- National Research Council of the National Academies. "When we added five years of county data and seven years of state data, allowing us to test an additional fourteen jurisdictions, we showed that the Lott and Mustard results collapse. No longer can any plausible case be made on statistical grounds that shall-issue laws are likely to reduce crime." -- Stanford Law Professor John J. Donohue III, Ian Ayres of Yale Law School: http://www.factcheck.org/2012/12/gun-rhetoric-vs-gun-facts/