I don't see your point but I'll follow in that a gun is just a tool. So tools are extensions of ourselves that enable us to do the things we want to do better. Hammers hit things, cars drive us faster than we walk, and guns kill things much more conveniently. We surround ourselves with these tools as we need to make life easier. Noone wants to drive nails with their hands, or walk many miles to work everyday. Guns are tools to kill in this same fashion (justified or not). But what if the tool you were using was ineffective? What if we had evidence showing that non-resistance leads to safety much more than the tools we use to protect ourselves (we do)? What if we had evidence that shows that 1 of 57 uses of that same tool were justified (we do? ) What if that tool was much more of a burden upon society than it is a protection to the individual? Personal responsibility has nothing to do with it. You have the right to own a car but you still have to use your seatbelts or have a car with airbags and mirrors to make the road safer for yourself and others. People are a holon of society. We may be individuals but we are definitely part of an inseparable whole. That's why we have laws. Personal responsibility is eat 3 meals a day, not 'dont murder.' they have nothing to do with each other.