Yes. If you own a gun it doesn't mean that you're planning to shot anyone with it or that it's bound to happen. If you say you use it as a defense weapon and you actually do that (which is what a lot of gun owners in the USA say) then its a defensive weapon.
It's not about shooting back with lightning fast reflexes. It's dissuasion, or sometimes against wild life too. It also doesn't mean its going to save you every time either. Nothing works every single time, we'd know by now.
Of course its also used to kill. For homicides, what not. Heck flower pots are used for homicides too.
The point is that the decision is in the hands of the human behind the trigger, if guns didn't exist, they'd use swords. If sword's didn't exist, they'd use blunts. and so on.
Once again your comment has nothing to do with what I am talking about...
I am not making a moral judgment about guns. I am merely stating they are not defensive weapons as they not designed for that...
Swords? Well, if you had a sword and I had a sword it is possible for me to block your strikes with my sword. Guns? No gun blocks bullets...
Walking around with a gun offers one no protection (unless you have it drawn and ready to fire at all times then maybe) but a false sense of security as my real life examples illustrated. Now, if you want to shot someone dead, guns (I would not suggest flower pots) do work really well for that...
It's not about shooting back with lightning fast reflexes. It's dissuasion, or sometimes against wild life too. It also doesn't mean its going to save you every time either. Nothing works every single time, we'd know by now.
Of course its also used to kill. For homicides, what not. Heck flower pots are used for homicides too.
The point is that the decision is in the hands of the human behind the trigger, if guns didn't exist, they'd use swords. If sword's didn't exist, they'd use blunts. and so on.