Does the number of people getting shot by their toddler siblings or after ringing a doorbell make up a significant percentage of total gun violence?
If not, then banning guns would be, in software terms, a premature optimization.
If not, then banning guns would be, in software terms, a premature optimization.
If we can reduce the level of trauma and fear in society, we can reduce associated behaviors.
How many lives are saved and traumas avoided through people's ability to defend themselves with guns? If that number is higher than the number of toddler accidents, gun ban would effectively cause an increase in PTSD and deaths.
P.S.: just to clarify, by "significant" I mean significant in a statistical sense of not being insignificant (very close to zero, noise-level), not "majority".
> How many lives are saved and traumas avoided through people's ability to defend themselves with guns
Self defence with guns sounds pretty traumatising for all involved to be fair.
Still, we're stepping deep into the speculation area here, so I won't stand behind this argument very strongly.
Realistically, your argument isn't to lessen trauma, but to simply normalize it. Which is exactly what American culture already does.
No, actually, my argument is that killing or injuring a person in self-defense is less traumatic than being helpless while getting assaulted.
Besides, trauma is relative - "normalizing" trauma is another way of saying "being desensitised" - which is exactly the process therapy itself employs to help people relieve the effects of it.
A person unknown to me was holding a submachine gun, and I could literally feel the muscles tensing in my stomach, where the gun was pointed at, anticipating the pain of a bullet. It was one of the most uncomfortable and frightening things I've felt in my life, so much that I still remember the dream quite vividly.
I assume being held at gunpoint in real life would be even more frightening.