First, that article is apparently a re-post, is it an old story? If so what motivation was there to re-post it if not political timing? Second, nobody with a r

First, that article is apparently a re-post, is it an old story? If so what motivation was there to re-post it if not political timing? Second, nobody with a rational mind, nobody with critical thinking skills, would ever or has ever asked that question. Carrying guns is not about reducing crime. The right to carry firearms is about empowering an individual to be less helpless in their own life in the case of a crime committed against them. It is a constant fraud of the anti-gun crowd to suggest that respecting the right to self defense and the right to carry arms is somehow indoctrination into a public defense agency. And it speaks volumes about the way they really think about freedom or an individual's liberty. It is a proven fact that carrying a gun visibily will reduce the risk of a person being assaulted in various ways by strangers on the street. If you want to fund a proper study we can doubly prove this. The visible presence of a firearm changes the way people behave. People who would behave in anti-social and criminal ways will think twice if they see their victim has a gun on their hip. I promise. That's not saying there aren't occasional freak exceptions. Some people's lives are so rotten they are aching to throw them away and take a few of us out with them. You can't do anything to stop them. That's what being free is, people are free to turn into monsters. What you can do is remain empowered to put them down if they become so rabid. Sorry for the lengthy comment. Protecting everyone's right to arm themselves is more important than any other aspect of this subject.