Interviews with criminals show that many pick and choose. Evidence has
shown that violent crime decreased in counties that changed their handgun
laws to allow people to carry. (in the US - See Lott) Areas that imposed
handgun control saw increased violent crime. Clearly, if you outlaw guns
only those who obey the laws will be unarmed. The handgun bans have been
ineffective in the US and I suspect elsewhere. Criminals will keep using
them until more effective deterrence is used.

The bottom line is that I would prefer to be allowed to defend myself
legally.

Luckily I am not as ripe a target for some violent crimes as other people.
I certainly would not refuse a 110 lb woman the right to defend herself
against a 220lb rapist.

Firearms are just tools. They will be used for evil by bad people and for
good by good people, just as other tools are used.


"Geoffrey Barnes" wrote in message
hlink.net...
If you were a criminal and wished to perpetrate a crime - would you
choose
an area where you were very certain law-abiding citizens had no way to
protect themselves, or an area where you were likely to end up on the
receiving end of justified defense?

What on earth makes you think that criminals somehow pick and choose where
they are going to commit a crime? Most of them don't have a whole array
of
transportation options. They more or less have to commit their offenses
within walking distance of wherever they wake up in the morning. They
don't
consult the internet, the census bureau, or even the World Almanac to
analyze handgun ownership patterns across various zip codes. Based on
interviews with offenders, it rather appears that most of them don't even
have any firm plan of committing an offense until maybe 10 seconds before
they actually do it, and they simply aren't bright enough to weigh all the
costs and benefits in those 10 seconds. Most of them wouldn't be able to
form a coherent thought if you gave them 10 hours.

I agree that, for you and -- both reasonable people -- it makes sense to
avoid areas that are well protected by an armed citizenry. But the guy
who
is desperately looking for $20 to get his next blast isn't all that
reasonable, and will go for the next open window he sees. If he had the
ability to think about things, he would be concerned with the pressence or
absence of an armed homeowner. But he isn't thinking about that, and
nothing is going to make him think about it.