&gt; <i>and used it</i><p>You couldn&#x27;t get more biased than this kind of selection for that sort of study. It&#x27;s like saying that the chance of spending time in a holding cell is very high, if you only look at subjects who have just been arrested that day. And it&#x27;s symptomatic of how Kleck is used - he does a study that is heavily specific to the conditions, and then it&#x27;s quoted free of context from day 1 and generalised to things it shouldn&#x27;t be generalised to.<p>Similarly, &#x27;carrying a gun&#x27; is very different to &#x27;carrying a gun <i>and using it</i>&#x27; - you have to be able to access and use the gun at the right time, and you don&#x27;t always have the drop on your attacker. I once did a bouncer certificate course, and the instructor said that in a study in Sydney, the most use of a gun in an encounter with an armed security guard was the guard&#x27;s own gun used against them - people were getting the drop on security guards and turning their guns on them. And one place where women tend to meet their rapists - bars and clubs - is a place where guns are usually restricted even in US states where gun freedom is common. Texas, for example, has a 51% law, meaning if a business makes 51%+ of it&#x27;s income from alcohol, you can&#x27;t carry a gun there. Women in these higher-risk places can&#x27;t legally carry this supposed magical defense item. Specifying &quot;and using it&quot; ignores all the issues around actually getting the gun into play at the right time, which aren&#x27;t trivial.<p>Ultimately, &quot;carry guns&quot; is a bad argument to make for personal safety, because it&#x27;s treating the symptom, not the cure, and short-circuits discussion to actually cut social problems off at the source, I find.<p>Re: the nationality thing - I never suggested you were American, but that&#x27;s the place in the modern Western world that is doing the &quot;guns as defence for normal citizens&quot; thing (and it&#x27;s where Kleck does his stuff). That&#x27;s why it&#x27;s a US-centric counter-argument. :)