Two wrongs do not a right make Nerio... and the man with the gun usually decides that he is one step away from being better off as a result of the power that piece of metal gives him. From your own point of view I could get into a discussion about the harm done to Africa from colonialism, and mismanagment of the return of government of the African states to their rightful owners... but then look at what greedy African iindividuals have done with the opportunities presented to them!?! And no amount of rock concerts, or little envelopes with a few dollar bills is ever going to change that situation.
Rich you asked for my opinion on this subject and I'll sum it up as this. Life lives on life, that is the unnatural order of things ( and the reason why I'm an atheist )... humankind however has, for whatever reason, come to the top of the heap, but has arrived at that point with what appears to be a collective memory loss... we seem to choose to ignore every childs tear, every mothers loss, every broken heart that got us to this point. We appear to be like the proverbial lost tribe... doomed to wander in a desert of our own making until we have nothing left to destroy. To my mind there is no answer... only a solution that has been staring us in the face for countless miienia, the which...because it is so obvious... we all prefer to ignore ( on that note I'm off to shoot myself

)
Mickeblue, again, I find solace in your wisdom.

I'd like to believe that humans have transcended mere animal instinct, but often find disillusionment in this belief. Humans beget humans and new ways to kill, maim, injure, and pschologically damage other humans, it seems. My decision is to not use guns, period. I don't support the availability of these weapons nor do I condone their use. I don't chastize those who do, however. I can understand hunting and the like, having grown up in Michigan. For myself, I prefer meat I can get at the store.
With regards to owning a gun purely for defensive purposes, wasn't that what the nuclear escalation during the cold war was about? If a country had enough nuclear weapons then it would strongly deter other foreign nations from launching a nuclear strike against them. Only it back-fired dramatically; did nothing but increase fear in the public and introduced new horrific phrases such as "atomic haulocast", "mutually-assured destruction" and "nuclear winter" into the public vernacular. By-and-large, I think ownership of weapons for defensive purposes is not a proactive means of avoiding conflict, but an enabling means for violence.