<Short answer: An honest, civilized human being is, in the long run, one who has an extended lifespan in an armed society comprised largely of decent human beings. Think of it as evolution in action.

Very true, but not necessarily ‘civil’ evolution.

I would have no problem at all with guns being widely available to citizens, since the good guys outnumber the bad guys by hundreds to one. I believe the violent crime rate would be almost nil, and the world would be a safer place for many reasons.

The weapons are available, Tom.

“Shop smart. Shop S-Mart.” -- Bruce Campbell, as Ash Williams in “Army of Darkness”.

Anyway, that ratio of yours changes as gangs of bad folks move about. I suppose this could be handled by restricting passage from state to state, county to county, town to town...

A gun in every holster, and a holster on every hip. A glamorous idea, one standing tall in romantic literature, but if the ‘law abiding’ citizenry lacks the backbone required to stand up and be counted, likely ‘alone’ at the crucial moment that the ultimate ‘truth’ eventually arrives, it remains a fantasy -- and that’s reality. Reality states that the average citizen is having second thoughts concerning armed civilians, as can readily be shown along the front lines of the NRA and Brady Bill campaigners.

It is obvious to even the dimmest intelligence, or it should be, that laws restricting gun ownership are effective only on people who are not criminals (you know, "lawbreakers). A sticker saying "When guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns" is laughed at derisively by liberals, despite the fact that every word is absolutely true.

Yes, absolutely -- but I think we will eventually knuckle under. Not in this generation, though.

Why does the Left fear an armed citizenry?

Unknown to me.

Possibly the politicians feel they are doing such a poor job in government that they might be forcibly overthrown? Maybe their constituents see too many kids being killed by gangland violence? Perhaps they both (politician & constituent) agree it is just simpler to refuse the public’s right, rather than insisting that schools educate students in proper weapons handling?

Maybe it’s the path of least resistance with the ill-educated constituents?

Why does any totalitarian country go around disarming citizens? You figure it out.

A coup is possible with citizens armed only with sticks, stones and slingshots, but much easier with a working arsenal of readily available firearms?

Dan