“You’re more likely to have your self-defense gun taken away and used against you than successfully using it to protect yourself.” For gun-grabbers, the “guns make things worse not better” argument is the ultimate fall back position. Although some gun control advocates attempt to back up the “devil in the blue dress” idea with scientific data, they can’t. No one knows the number of successful defensive gun uses (including “simple” brandishing). No one knows how many of these DGUs involved retention issues. In truth, the “your gun arms the bad guys” argument is based on black swan-style anecdotal evidence and emotional manipulation. In some recent news stories, “it” happened. Well, in reverse . . .


Nashville’s fox17.com reported that a man named Stephen Cronk met-up with a woman at a gas station. Regardless of the reason for the meet, Cronk forced the woman at gunpoint to an Aberdeen hotel room. Cronk [allegedly] raped the woman. When he left his handgun unattended, the victim grabbed it and shot Cronk once in the abdomen. He fled the hotel. The female barricaded herself in the hotel room and called 911 for help.

wlbt.com reports that two men broke into a Memphis home around 1:00 a.m. Sunday. During the robbery, one of the suspects was shot in the chest; and died of his wound. The homeowner was also shot, suffering an injury to his leg. Later in the article we learn that “the victim’s girlfriend said her boyfriend managed to wrestle the suspect’s gun away in time to shoot him.”

Turnabout is fair play—both literally and rhetorically. If gun control advocates gain traction by relying on anecdotal evidence to scare people into supporting their position, shouldn’t the pro-gun side use equally anecdotal examples of successful defensive gun uses to bolster out position?

I can’t remember the last time I saw a request for real data from a gun control advocate here and the response was anything other than plain balderdash. In fact, the anti-gun side seem to have a pathological aversion to facts. They refuse to consider the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.

Of course, there’s a reason why gun control advocates don’t use scientific analysis and rational argument to defend their agenda: it doesn’t work. The facts don’t support their theories. Lucky for them, most of society isn’t particularly interested in, or capable of, rational debate. Lucky for them, fear sells. They’re prone to group think.

I think this is the reason that the Founding Fathers made the right to keep and bear arms an individual right. I also think the cultural normalization of self-defense will win at the end. Emotional arguments, faux logic and bold-faced lies do not stand the test of time.

Recommended For You

10 Responses to Gun Rights vs. Gun Control: Turnabout Is Fair Play

  1. “Emotional arguments, faux logic and bold-faced lies do not stand the test of time”.

    — I do hope that in the long run the truth will set us free. I had to smile reading this piece as a different political cause I support has also been dealing with the same adversarial tactics for the past 45+ years.

  2. “Criminals, don’t bring a gun when you go to rob/rape someone, the victim will just take your weapon away and use it against you”

    I like it.

  3. I like that holster from a practical standpoint but it doesn’t protect the gin from being hit or having the gun scrape against things. Holsters protect the firearm as much as secure it .
    I’d rather not outsource my personal protection to a group-thinking bunch of policy wonks who think they know it all.

  4. I just read the story, and they keep caller the robber a “victim”. This fool got what he deserved and now there’s one less “victim/robber” on the streets.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *