Baron Von PWN wrote:I'm not saying it can't. I'm just suspicious that It would provide protection to the degree that gun owners would suffer from fewer crimes than non gun-owners.
I don't know about the fewer-crimes argument. Personally however, I view it as a peace-of-mind issue. You're correct that the presence of a weapon doesn't change the likelihood of a crime if no one is home to use it. However, if I'm not home, I'm not nearly as concerned about a robbery. Because while they'll steal my stuff and I'll be all kinds of pissed off and feeling violated and such...it's just stuff that largely can be replaced. But if my wife or I are at home, our lives could well be in danger, and the weapon then has the usefulness of ensuring that we're protected.
So I don't see it so much as stuff-protection but rather personal-protection.