Gun Control & RKBA

We don't accept the questions as presented.

For instance,

If an armed society is a polite society, then do you agree that the problem in Chicago is that there just aren’t enough guns?

Guns do not cause violence, they are potentially a means to inflict violence, a tool. Would the gangs and other miscreants in Chicago be less violent without guns, or would they purportedly just use guns less in their violence? Large cities like London and Paris in countries with stricter gun laws than the United States still suffer from comparable levels of general violent crime like assault, rape, burglary and robbery as large cities in the USA like Chicago, NYC and LA. It's the reason why plastic cutlery has warnings labels and age restrictions in the UK. Similarly, although two-thirds of death from firearms in the USA are suicides, our suicide rate is comparable (and sometimes lower) than much of Europe, Canada and Australia, and significantly lower that gun control havens like Japan and South Korea.

Since Heller and McDonald expanded gun rights in Chicago, including concealed carry, has gun crime increased in the city, no less from those lawfully empowered to own and carry firearms? Does permitting law-abiding citizens the means to defend themselves under current standards make Chicago more violent or less "polite?"

Simply, you and the OP (or the OP's Google dump sources since he rarely, if ever, actually shares his own thoughts or participates in his own threads) do not set the terms of the gun debate, particularly since the current status quo, polling trends, electoral realities and established jurisprudence favor those supporting firearm rights.