In my experience, “no one needs” is a pretty common excuse from anti-gunners as to why we shouldn’t own guns, or at least, why we should be limited to how many guns we own. There’s a big problem with that – it isn’t called the “Bill of Needs” – it is called the “Bill of Rights.” Rosa Parks didn’t “need” to sit at the front of the bus did she? But she sat in the front of the bus anyways because she believed it was her right.
Let’s take a quick side note and look at some numbers, since the anti-gunners think law abiding gun owners are more likely to kill everyone around them.
According to the FBI, there were more than there were more than 64,606,000 violent crimes reported from 1960-2013. Of these 64.6 million crimes, firearms were used about 28 million times over the course of those 53 years. All of this puts violent crimes at about a 4% rate across the US and a gun is used in about 43% of violent crime.
This data set is often shown to make the claim that gun owners are two times as likely to commit violent crime compared to non gun owners.
There’s a big problem with that. It assumes the people committing the crimes obtained their firearms legally and/or are otherwise lawfully allowed to own those firearms. The truth is, fewer than 6% of legally owned guns are used by their legal owners to commit crimes. This means that the vast majority of violent crime is committed by criminals who go out of their way to illegally obtain firearms with the intent to commit crime.
How many of these criminals would have woken up in the morning, realized they didn’t have a firearm, and then decided they won’t go rob/rape/murder because they didn’t have a firearm? How many of these criminals would rob/rape/murder using some other inanimate object anyways if they couldn’t obtain a firearm illegally?