And what about the significant amount of illegal uses of handguns that certainly outweigh purely defensive uses. I'm not asserting that gun ownership should be outlawed but it should be regulated much more stringently, with mandated, legitimate, sufficient background checks and waiting periods. Furthermore, I'm a bit skeptical of your statistics considering their origin. The Cato Institute as you know is a wholly conservative, right wing institution and thus it's "statistics" will obvious skew to the conservative ideology -- gun ownership being one of them. And as Benjamin Disraeli said: "There's lies, there's damn lies and there's statistics".

I was not sure why Mr. Jacoby picked this topic until the 3rd paragraph from the bottom. Clearly the recent incident in Florida shows the result of armed vigilantes and fear of having to take responsibility for one's destructive acts. It is always a mystery why the personal responsibility crowd, well, doesn't want to take responsibility. Mr. Jacoby also uses poor logic in citing a negative on the impact of crime on Colorado campuses. There is absolutely no evidence that drops in crime in any significant way is related to packing a weapon. In fact those states that have more liberal laws on gun access have higher crime rates where such weapons are used. The tragedy in Florida is about humanely facing the issue about gun use responsibility not its ownership, Mr. Jacoby is taking the side that if someone fires a revolver and a person is hurt or killed then it should be weighted on the side of "self defense." The police are investigated in depth after a firearm is used in confrontations, the same should apply to less trained citizens or those possibly holding a grudge.

When I read, "a right wing institution" I translate to "some nut case group". The term conservative has become, to some writers, the new, stylized southern term for African Americans so hateful in its intent. Any issue such as gun control, especially in liberal states, is a red flag waved in the face of that charging bull determined to trample on the right to disagree. The truth that society has changed radically in recent years is not news. Self-delusion and denial will not alter the truth that criminals become less inclined to steal from a person who is capable of shooting him. That is not a difficult concept to understand. Senior citizens living in rural areas wisely choose to own guns. No reasonable person can ascribe the ownership of a self-defense weapon to their voting records. All those statistics that "obviously skew to conservative ideology" seems an unlikely use of facts to falsify reality.

Oh, do live in Florida and experience the sad results of your ideals.

When countries with very few guns have crime rates much lower than ours and when countries with as many guns have much lower crime rates than ours (and vice versa) it becomes clear that gun ownership rates do not have a simple link to public safety. On the other hand, the claim that concealed carry laws have anything to do with making people safer is the dumbest thing I've ever heard. More guns in the hands of more people who think they need one but actually don't is always going to mean more accidental shootings and aggressive stupidty.

If the gun lobby would allow the federal crime agencies to track handguns the way they want to, we'd be able to catch those who are supplying guns illegally. But no, they don't want even reasonable regulations.

I've always had the luxury of knowing my eyesight is too poor to be confident I could accurately aim a firearm and hit an intended target, so I don't think a pistol would make me safer, but that's just me. As to the issue with home invasions, a barking dog is a great deterrent, as is a burgler alarm. It seems, however, that enforcing the laws we already have would be preferable to rushing to pass new ones.

I too am troubled with the timing of this article. It comes across as a dismissal of the event in Florida and doesn't address the underlying issues of racism that this topic raises. Of course Jacoby has told us many times in previous articles how he feels about that subject (racism no longer exists). JJ also does not offer any rational reason why anyone should be carrying guns around a college campus. I'm sure that he would bring up the canard of the lone psychopath on a hunting spree for innocent victims but I don't think that scenario comes up very often. Not often enough to carry handguns in class. The kids have played too many third-person shooter games for me to feel comfortable with that.

Maybe that would first-person shooter I believe. YKWIM

Fast and furious. Where is Kerry?

That's right JJ. And it says in the Bible that Jesus carried a sword, and he wasn't afraid to use it either.

Jeff, you may have the facts on your side but your timing is awful!

An occasional trip to the old combat zone when I was younger convinced me that when people consider someone else may be dangerous they become very polite. I had more trouble in my own neighborhood. There may be ocasional domestic dispute shootings, but on the whole, I think people with criminal intentions would be less inclined to bother somewone who may be carrying. Who's going to pull a weapon when they feel everyone around them is armed?

Don't know why you're writing this? No one is proposing any real gun laws that are new, and Obama has INCREASED gun rights even as the Tea Partiers packing heat say he wants to take their 2nd Amendment solutions away! It's true - Obama signed the law allowing guns in national parks. There is NO Federal gun control agenda...they've given up. It's only NRA scare tacticsthat continue and Jeff is, as usual, falling in line.

Well, seems like you need to look at this: among families with a gun in the house "for protection", who is most likely to be harmed if the gun actually gets fired? Statistically, how many intruders are shot or deterred by waving a gun at them, versus how many little kids accidentally shoot themselves or drunken husbands decide to use the gun against their wives one night? What are the numbers? Intruders/criminals shot or otherwise deterred vs. family members who die at the hands of household guns? Anyone?

danthegas, according to the CDC, the number of children who die from firearms accidents is at an all-time low, 138 deaths 14 and under. In terms of murders, the vast majority of murders in the US are by drug gang members. Law-abiding citizens don't suddenly decide to kill someone. And if a drunk man wants to kill his wife, he doesn't need a gun -- there is a large, sharp knife in every kitchen. The best estimate of the number of times firearms are used defensively in the US is about 2.5 to 3 million times per year. In more than 90% of those incidents, no shot is ever fired. You can find more statistics here: http://gunsafe.org/position%20statements/Guns%20and%20crime.htm

He does not have facts on his side. He is being selective(as usual) and has no credibility as a journalist.

If more guns are better, what would have happened if Trayvon had his own gun? If he felt "threatened" he could have shot the vigilante, and been justified...

ask americans how many feel good about being in the same room as a concealed weapon - a very different question than "do they support gun ownership?" and you know that Jeff - because you are a smart guy

It appears that Mr Jacoby did not read very far; check out: http://www.lcav.org/statistics-polling/gun_violence_statistics.asp http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/news/press-releases/2007-releases/press01112007.html

There are multiple examples of safe societies, and in none of them is gun ownership common. The US ranks #1 in the world in gun ownership per capita and is among the highest in gun fatalities. I don't doubt that Jacoby believes this nonsense he's written. It's par for the course. The reality is that the prevalence of guns makes the US one of the most dangerous developed countries in the world.

Giermund, if I was one of those students at Virginia Tech when Seung-Hui Cho started killing people, I sure would have wanted to have had my handgun with me, and chances are fewer people would have been killed. College campuses are no oasis devoid of violent crime. Students on and off campus are murdered, raped, and robbed. Their lives are just as valuable as any other citizen and it is their right to be able to defend themselves. "Gun-free" zones don't stop murderers from killing people -- it just makes their job easier and increases the body count.

Huh? Are you being sarcastic or serious with this comment? If sarcastic I can understand, if serious, then where do you get this from? From my reading of the scriptures, he told Peter to put away the sword as those that lived by the sword would die by the sword.

Thank you for articulating what I was thinking, but a young black male with a legal gun in FL is unlikely, and if he did have a carry permit, he would have been detained and arrested on the scene. Sad but true.