Citizen A: 5’6″, 150 lbs. Minding their own business.
Citizen B: 6’0″, 200 lbs. Opts to mind Citizen A’s business. Violently.
In response, Citizen A arms self with 12-inch butcher’s knife. Deadliest weapon they’re able to get their hands on.
Citizen B, anticipating resistance, arms self with axe, consisting of 8-pound blade-head attached to the end of a 3′ wooden handle and, to mix things up a bit, let’s say Citizen B…
…because he’s a coward at heart, brings an equally aggressive, like-minded cohort to back him up: Citizen B-2.
Citizen A’s personal experience with physical combat? Little to none.
Citizen B’s personal experience with physical combat? From childhood to present day.
For Citizen A, violence is an abstraction. Fuel for intellectual debates with civilized company. They’re not only adept at giving equal consideration to all sides of an issue, they thrive on it.
For Citizen B, violence is a crude tool frequently employed for problem-solving. They aren’t just familiar with violence, they thrive on it. It’s who they are.
And now, it comes down to this, one-on-one. Citizen B wishes to possess something Citizen A’s unwilling to part with.
The weapons in their hands aren’t the only factors in the outcome of this confrontation. Strength, skill, speed, determination and/or luck are also up for consideration.
If the sight of the knife fails to impress the larger threat, the smaller, less experienced half of this impromptu gladiator match–
—which, after all, does resemble a twisted spectacle debauched Romans would have cheered in the Coliseum—
–now, that show of force having failed, the victimized party now has to come within arm’s length of the attacker to fend them off.
Not good odds for Citizen A, any way you figure.
Now change the dynamic; place a loaded handgun, rifle or shotgun in the trained, confident hands of Citizen A.
Emphasis on ‘trained’.
The odds just shifted in Citizen A’s favor, regardless of Citizen B’s size, strength, speed, determination or skill. One round center-mass very likely wipes away all of it. Same applies to his buddy, Citizen B-2, should he choose to remain on scene.
But why prepare for an unpleasant possibility when it’s so much easier, and loftier, to simply dismiss it outright as an unlikely, paranoid wet dream of “Second Amendment Cultists”, ie. “gun nuts”?
Faced with an immediate threat of violence, there’s nothing admirable about refusing to defend yourself. That’s laziness, at best. At worst? Cowardice masquerading as enlightened compassion.
When anti-gun leftists seek to disarm law-abiding citizens, whether they’re aware of it or not, it fits into their overall mindset of Leveling The Playing Field™.
Faced with the unpleasant reality of someone bent on committing grievous bodily harm to yourself or your family, sharing a level playing field with your attacker is the last thing you want.
Unless you get off on the notion of being victimized.
Or lack the imagination to even consider its possibility.