6 separate, cowardly attacks across Paris; 158 dead, at least 99 people in critical condition. Perhaps a little profiling was wanted here: It may have saved lives. Perhaps [public] people carrying a few guns would have saved some lives. Perhaps a strict immigration/travel policy may have saved lives.

How many lives would one gun in the hands of a law-abiding citizen saved? How about one in each of the six attack sites? Maybe none, but perhaps 20 or more might have been saved. An AK-47 has a practical firing rate of 100 rds/min; in semi-automatic mode, 40 rds/min, full cyclic mode, 600 rds/min. That's a lot of lead flying around in the air, aimed at civilians, in the hands of cowardly masked terrorists. One masked coward hit with a couple of rounds by a person with a concealed carry permit - or even a business owner - may save lives.

If theirs is such a noble endeavour - to purge the world of "infidels" - why do terrorists wear masks?

From the link:
 
So should guns be removed from the hands of citizens? It is a debate that will continue for a long time, I expect. The individuals in this Paris attack did not have background checks or permits to carry, and were carrying weapons that even many NRA members don't possess.
 

3,400: Americans who died by Terrorism since 2001

3,400: Americans who died by household Firearms since five weeks ago.

1.4 Million: Americans who died in all Wars fought since 1776.

1.4 Million: Americans who died via household Guns since 1968

More guns results in more deaths.

I see you have conveniently left out the number of Britons saved in WWI, II with guns.

Guns are obviously here to stay, even in your own country. The Paris Judiciaire carried guns to respond to the attack.

 

Taking the tack that eliminating guns will result in fewer deaths is naive at best.

Let's look at knives in England:

So by your logic, since knives kill people, all knives should be banned. It is too simplistic a view, ANT. I've provided links for my sources.

Gun Homicide Rate Down 49% Since 1993 Peak; Public Unaware

    Homicide




 

Incidentally, ANT, automobiles kill people too, so we should ban the ownership and use of them. To wit:
  Fatality Facts

Do you believe gun ownership results in the less innocent deaths?

I don't believe guns have a practical use for members of the general public, outside of maybe hunting. Knives obviously have a practical use in the kitchen. There is a huge difference between killing with a gun and a knife. Attacking with a knife is so much more involved, but also so much easier to defend.

Deaths from cars generally aren't deliberate acts of murder, poor comparison.

> Perhaps a strict immigration/travel policy may have saved lives.

Fuckwit.

This saves me typing:

If anyone you know tries to use last night's attacks as a reason to turn away migrants and asylum seekers, please just remind them that most asylum seekers are trying to escape precisely the sort of people who perpetrated the Paris attack. They're not bringing it with them, they're trying to escape it.

Tell that to the dead.

Is it easier to defend against someone with a gun or someone with a knife? 

I expected better from you, Peter. Resorting to base expletives is a rather low form of wit, don't you think?

Try replacing "fuck" with "intercourse" and see how it sounds.

 

I don't want to turn away migrants and asylum seekers, but I do want to prevent illegal immigration and scoundrels from entering anyone's country - just as I want to make sure that guns don't get into the hands of a schizophrenic, psycopath, sociopath, manic-depressive, paranoiac, drug addict or a Methodist.

Doesn't matter, deaths just the same. Guns are necessary because outlaws have guns; our POTUS has seen fit to release 6,000 prisoners from Federal prisons, so who knows where they will end up? Crime generally repeats, particularly for the institutionalised. Our POTUS has pussy-footed with Syria; so then the terrorists come to America

Not all gun crimes are deliberate either, although most are.

What happens when ISIS comes to England in retaliation for airstrikes in northern Iraq? What do you combat them with, the back of a leather glove and refusing them afternoon tea? An ounce of prevention...

A gun. Most people are incredibly bad shots and can't hit the broad side of a barn with one, let alone a moving target. Problem is, most people freeze with panic instead of taking action.

By the way, [Briton] Jihadi John was pretty handy with knife, wasn't he?

> I expected better

Consider what that indicates.

> illegal immigration

What makes a person moving from one free country to another illegal?

> and scoundrels

Violence begets violence.

If you want to stop it, determine what actions combined to cause innocent children to grow into murderers.

Just to go along with your woeful car analogy for a moment, we are moving towards driverless cars and in the not so distant future people will probably be incredulous that we drove them ourselves. "Didn't that cause a lot of deaths?" "Oh yes, millions".

How many of the ludicrously common mass shootings in the USA are ended by a bystander with a gun? It's roughly zero, as far as I know.

Although, to be fair, if almost everybody carried a gun I'm sure that there would be far more mass shootings ended by a bystander with a gun.

Take that how you see fit.

Damn good point. I suspect, though it's not laudable, most people's first reaction would be to get the shitfuck away from someone with a gun, not trying to be a hero and take whoever it is down.

Even with a gun, would you want to put yourself in the firing line? I appreciate there's a certain type of person willing to do that, most likley professional bodyguards and military types.

>>A gun. Most people are incredibly bad shots and can't hit the broad side of a barn with one, let alone a moving target. Problem is, most people freeze with panic instead of taking action.

And yet you advocate arming everyone so they can take a pop at the terrorists.

If we are going to do this, we should acknowledge that for example Canada have their citizens allowed guns and they manage not to shoot each other nearly as much as people do in the USA. So it's not only having guns that is the problem, there's more to it than that. Still, I'm not sure why people like fixrman are often so keen on other nations getting MORE guns. I live in London and. It is not rare to see someone losing their temper at some point during the day. Why would adding guns help? Meanwhile we have armed police for those situations where people are using illegal weapons and it seems to work ok most of the time.

Canada has about the same amount of territory as the USA, but a tenth of the population. There are fewer gun deaths because the bullets just go through the gaps between the people.