This is not necessarily net positive. Increased gun prevalence is a strong incentive to escalate (and by "escalate" I mean someone getting killed in a situatio

This is not necessarily net positive. Increased gun prevalence is a strong incentive to escalate (and by "escalate" I mean someone getting killed in a situation where it would not be necessary or helpful for ANYONE involved), even if only one party is armed. It does not even matter which "side": Police, criminals and victims are all more likely to fire because of perceived threat (compared to nations where it is vanishingly unlikely for anyone to be armed with a firearm).