If not all people should have guns, who should have guns exactly?

Not necessarily. There is also denying some societal privileges until you comply, etc. Violence isn’t the only answer. Unless you live all alone and self sufficient deep in the woods where nobody sees you (and you would therefore be no threat so it becomes moot anyway) there are many other options here.

 

Yes. I do. You should not have handguns in my opinion. Be glad I don’t live in your country and don’t have any government power.

Again, your rush to violence is another reason you should not be armed. I don’t want to do anything to you except remove the threat of you having guns. And if that is reason enough for you to rush to violence, then you are displaying extra reason to disarm you.

 

No. You want to send other people - armed with handguns - to do it.
If it were up to YOU to do it, my handguns would stay mine.

There's no "rush to violence" here -- I stated a simple fact.
The people who wrote and debated and ratified the 2nd amendment had people like you in mind while doing it.

 

Except you'll attempt to accomplish that aim by sending people with guns to force his compliance on pain of death. Don't pretend that's not what this is about, its disingenuous.

 

What about private security guards and home defense use?

Should the owner of a liquor store in a bad neighborhood, who has faced repeated robberies, not be allowed to have the means to defend their store?
If that is the case, you will see many small stores in bad neighborhoods with high crime rates close.
Look up the socioeconomic phenomena called "food deserts", where poor people don't have access to fresh food because no one will locate in their neighborhood to sell it to them.

(You say you're not from the USA, so maybe you don't understand what things are like there)

In Mexico everyone has thick metal bars over the windows, to protect themselves since the crime rate is so bad, but sometimes that ends up causing unnecessary deaths in fire situations, since people can't escape out through the windows.

The point is, there are trade-offs.

 

Let's point out that police response times out in the woods can often be several hours.
Many places out in the woods have no mobile phone reception, and robbers have been known to snip phone lines before they break into a house.

I've read several stories where a woman living alone out in a remote area shot an intruder dead, and later they found out that intruder was a convicted rapist.

 

Arming the people + pumping continuous fear into the people = the gun violence we see in the USA. I would be much less inclined towards opposing people having guns if this was another and less fearful people.

 

Is the woman who successfully defends herself by using a gun from being raped by a man one of those fearful people?

Some fears are well founded.

 

Some Progressives honestly believe it is better for her to just sit there and take it... And she can always have an abortion afterwards, "no biggie".

 

They sound like horrible people.

 

Go read up on what's happening in Europe, and the advice they give women.

Government agencies are recommending she crap in her pants, and hopefully that will make the rapist go away.
Or telling women they should wear a special bracelet that contains a breakable vile, so she can make herself smell like a skunk if she feels unsafe. (Not joking!)

There was recently a case where a woman in Denmark sprayed her would-be rapist with pepper spray, some foreign man that tried to attack her randomly on the street, and when she reported the incident to police, she was cited with an $450 (equivalent) fine, because it wasn't legal for her to carry pepper spray.

Some government agencies are even telling women they better start covering up, and be more like muslim women, if they don't want to get sexually assaulted. (This in hyper-progressive European countries that not too long ago fought for the right to nudity)

 

Gotta be Germans. It's always the Germans.

 

What progressives say that?

I know an Anti-Choicer who thinks women aren't harmed by rape....remember who???