Fair enough, just seems rather daft to me. I can't help wondering, if you had someone pointing a gun at your face, whether you would risk it. I doubt it. Interesting, clearly I misread it. That said, that does rely rather heavily on the firearm in question having a stiff trigger. Having seen firearms go off when the firer accidentally put too much pressure on the trigger I frankly wouldn't risk it. I didn't say it was useless, I said it was unnecessary. The two are fundamentally different. Incidentally, you use the word 'know' all too readily don't you. I am perfectly happy for people to be able to defend themselves. I object to every idiot and his dog being able to own a firearm. Who is talking about running, by the sounds of it you live in some sort of war-zone (the comparison to jet fighter combat), doesn't take a genius to work out that it's better not to live there. If I lived in a crummy part of town where gunmen and muggers lurk behind every corner and I could move to somewhere better I would, however many firearms I could carry on my person. I am perfectly happy to defend myself, I'd just rather not have to, is there something wrong with that? To be honest, this is a fairly pointless debate. Since you are so sure that everyone is out there to mug you and the second you stop carrying a firearm the streets will fill with drug smugglers, muggers and assorted evildoers you may as well keep carrying your guns. Interesting question though, does the fact that citizens carry guns simply cause criminals to carry them?