Jenni, your right, 🙂 but it is because I believe murder is murder and not having a firearm is no impediment. The great majority of owners of firearms do obey the laws. You are pointing out the criminal element in the third most populated country in the world, so naturally the volume of crime will be great.
Home-made bombs, arson, knives, bats, cars and poison are all good alternative methods to taking lives and I doubt that the lack of firearms would stop anyone who has malice in their heart, or profit as a motive from making an end to another. On the other hand, I do know that an armed, responsible citizenship, in this case concealed carry permit holders, have so far, had a very positive impact on crime in those states that trust their residents to bear arms. Crimes have been reduced in those areas because criminals know there is a chance they may select an armed 'victim' and pay a heavy toll for their trespass.
By-the-by, an article not long ago noted that an U.K. group of doctors were lobbying to ban pointed kitchen knives ( and perhaps other types) as they were seeing a goodly number of stabbing coming into the E.R.s. Is it the cutlery, the cutlery makers or the people wielding the knives at fault? Should everyone loose their chefs and paring knives because of a relatively few bad actors and the doctors who see the damage done?
It's funny, but not four weeks ago, my neighbor appeared at my door, in the cold, about 1:00 am in her nightgown, clutching her infant in terror, with her 5-6 year old clinging to her gown. Her husband was away, and she heard glass breaking in her house and believed her home was being invaded. She ran to my place because she knew she would find people who would be willing and able to, if push came to shove, protect her family. This, by-the-way was not the first time a neighbor has sought and found such assistance from my family and I.
I will also note that last year, three houses up and 'cross the street, a gang of men invaded a home, an old gang house, and beat, robbed and raped a woman and her family/friends. I do not know if that family was armed or not, and I won't pretended to know the potential outcome of any resistance that they might have offered, if the opportunity presented itself. I do know that an unarmed, unprepared victim has virtually no chance to resist at all.
I ask you, if your family or friends were threatened with robbery, beatings and rape, would you submit or resist? If resistance is your answer, would you want that resistance to have a chance at being effective?
I know there are people who like to think that the police will stop the criminals, but most of the time all they can do is make a record of the crime and work from there to track down the bad guys as best they are able. You should also remember when you you call on police to assist you, (at least in most countries) you are calling for guns for protection. Whether or not they arrive in time is a whole 'nother story.
Back to the topic of gun terminology in photography, is it just me or do others find instructors who impose these petty restrictions on the speech of their students to be somewhat unethical? It's one thing be able to correctly define F-stop and EV. Changing the way students use words to discuss their photography, in this pc way, seems to me to be beyond the pale.
Cheers
