Do you by any chance live in a cave with a stable internet connection ? <| sep |> Are you supposed to tackle your own team ? <| sep |> Yes , but that doesn ' t matter if you ' re a 100 lb . woman or a guy in a wheelchair . The 200 lb . attacker can kill you with or without a gun . A gun is the only equalizer in that scenario . Empirically , how often do guns actually prevent the sort of scenario you described ? Is strongman on weakwoman or weakman crime rampant in countries that practice strict gun control , as we would expect if that thesis were correct ? And what ? That ' s a crime . It ' s a crime if they don ' t successfully lodge reasonable belief of need to use force for selfdefense as an affirmative defense , and whether or not they can do so is a jury issue . The point I was making with that question is that there is a cost to allowing people to possess and carry firearms for personal defense many people will use firearms unreasonably , even if they only intend to use them for selfdefense . Allowing them on the theory that they are useful for selfdefense doesn ' t seem to be justified if the unintended costs outweigh the benefits of allowing people to carry guns for selfdefense .