Letter From the American West: Gun Debate Misses the Mark TUCSON, Arizona - In the Philippines, as in most places, gun violence has some definition to it; you can calculate odds in any given situation. In Manila and Mindanao, just recently, my street-smarts alarm barely buzzed.Then I came home to Arizona. As the NRA says, guns don't kill people -- people kill people. And with so many unbalanced individuals packing heat, you never know what to expect. Two Januarys ago here, an assassin in a Safeway grocery store parking lot shot Congresswoman Gabby Giffords in the head and killed six others. Millions were raised for a National Institute for Civil Discourse. Bill Clinton and the elder George Bush, honorary chairmen, flew to Tucson for the speeches. Discourse is no more civil today, but assault weapons sell more briskly than ever. The NRA wants not only to post rent-a-cop commandos at schools but also to arm teachers. Rosanne Thompson pierced the lunacy in a letter to the Arizona Daily Star: "I am a teacher - and I consistently misplace my keys, glasses, book bag, paper, pens. And you want me to carry a gun? What about Salpointe, the Catholic high school here? Guns for nuns? No one is likely to ban guns in what used to be the Wild West, with so much flying lead deep in its culture. But you'd think a little sense would apply. Sure, respect the Second Amendment. People should have all the muskets and muzzle-loaders they want. But in 1791 the point was to keep militiamen ready to beat back the British. Anyone who now thinks he can overthrow government with a personal armory (as attractive as that sometimes sounds) probably should be limited to peashooters. The French, to name one example, bear plenty of arms. I'm careful during wild boar season not to snuffle under my olive trees in a brown fur coat. Otherwise, I don't worry. In France, you can't drop in to a gun show and buy a jeep-mounted sniper cannon that turns deer into pink slime. European kids are taught at a young age to respect weaponry, and laws limit anyone's ability to pump automatic fire into a crowd. Yet, still, tragedies happen. The gun debate in America seems to miss reality. Being armed may help on occasion but seldom protects against serious threat. As a reporter, I've happened upon hostile soldiers, terrorists and bandits. In no situation could I have shot myself to safety. On the contrary, with a gun on my hip I could hardly pass as a peaceable noncombatant. After the Giffords shooting, one sensible witness said he had a gun, with a clear shot at the killer. But, he added, had he drawn it in the confusion, security people would likely have blasted him on the spot. If an upstate New York psychopath targets firemen, armed guards are not likely to save them. Weapons on fire trucks or, worse, where kids go to school only further sicken a society. If authorities can't screen out all the crazies, at least they can limit their firepower. In an America plagued by unstable psyches and overstocked armories, it is as the NRA says. People, not guns, kill. That's the problem.