For many years, firearms have been considered effective defensive weapons. If you think things through you will realize that due to the deadly potential of guns they are really a poor choice for personal protection for the vast majority of people. Those are the people dependant on others to protect them and keep them safe. However, if you don’t have personal security guards, who do you rely on? The police are not always within reach. We all remember hearing the phrase; “there’s never a cop around when you need them”.

The use of firearms
is unwarranted in many circumstances. Their use in any situation can have grave consequences. The use of a gun in defending oneself from an assault could be considered “excessive force” in some instances. It would be up to the victim to prove that a life-threatening situation occurred and deadly force had to be used. Unfortunately, even when the victim is not charged with a crime for using a licensed gun they could find themselves on the defensive side of a civil lawsuit.

The intent of personal protection devices
is not to distract and disable the attacker and be able to escape to get help. Avoidance is always the best choice, but when this is not an option, a weapon can be the only salvation. The purpose of using a gun or any defensive weapon is to “STOP THE ATTACK“!  A large number of the people using a gun for self-defense don’t know when to pull the trigger and when not to. Professional law enforcers have to go through intensive training in shoot or don’t shoot scenarios and yet they still sometimes get caught up in legal problems. This is one of the primary reasons to get proper self-defense training.

Assailants have been known
to kill or seriously injure someone in a matter of minutes after they had been shot defensively, even many hours after being shot with so-called man stopper ammunition. This is why you are told in self-defense training to continue shooting until the threat is no longer present.

Sometimes the emotional trauma and psychological effects of a victim shooting another person can be devastating. Even veteran law enforcement officers are many times affected, especially if the perpetrator is killed. Many victims are unprepared for the intense emotional aftermath of killing someone [even in self-defense] and whose agenda was to only protect him or herself. This scenario is a very real possibility when firearms are used.

When there is the presence of a gun, the criminal action sometimes increases the possibility of a death or serious injury. Once a firearm is introduced by the victim, its use is frequently, but not always, the only action remaining, and an innocent person may be injured or killed. As previously mentioned, the use of the gun by the victim [ justified or not] is subject to legal litigation. Maybe the victims will not be charged with a crime, but it would be possible to find themselves at the wrong end of a long and costly civil lawsuit.

Last, but not least

There is a large burden on the gun owner to properly secure their firearms. There is always the possibility of a child or teenager getting their hands on a firearm with tragic results. Once again, I reiterate here my views on the security of firearms in the home. “If the gun in question is ‘on your person’ then the aforementioned child or teenager can not get to it without your knowledge.” I am quoting myself here from many writings and opinions given in comments to other writers.

In closing

I would like to repeat; Firearms can have a legitimate and useful role in self and home defense, but only [and I stress only] if the person is fully trained on the use and handling of the firearm, totally comprehending the responsibility and consequences of the use of a gun and has the psychological toughness to use a firearm for the purpose of self-defense.