I don't think private firearms are very useful for international conflicts like Ukraine/Russia or to defeat terrorist attacks.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warsaw_Ghetto_Uprising
Might have been nice if it happened all across Poland rather than just Warsaw.
This is actually a really good example for why we don't want to ban weapons: Genocides are often perpetrated by the country the victims actually belong to.
Examples: Germany under Nazism, former Yugoslavia, Rwanda, -I'm fairly sure the list goes on.
I feel totally safe and I'm actually happy knowing that many of my neighbors have weapons. Especially here in Norway were I know there are strict background checks on who gets permits.
(For Americans: What I would do is start cooperating with NRA like Nordic countries has traditionally done with their local equivalents. Work not to prohibit guns but to promote safe storage and safe practices.)
There is a very long list of countries that are doing better than fine and severely restricting gun ownership. Long before it becomes the case that you need guns to defend your space, you may want to take a long hard look at the politics of your community / country.
The times are right, because many people are researching guns now due to external factors. It's a growing market for such NGO as mine (even though i don't profit off it).
Plus, take into account that US has a very messed up situation with guns, laws and relations between groups of people. Nobody's trying to copy that over here, we have better role models.
Not really:
* There is always someone with a bigger gun
* There is always someone who wants to steal your gun/ammo
* There is always a bigger gang that wants to steal your gun
If your solution is to join up with others to make your gang the biggest/best armed and enforcing a monopoly on the use of violence, congratulations, you've either reinvented Warlordism, or in the best case, reinvented the idea of a police force, depending on whether or not the head of the gang answers to a civil authority whose legitimacy comes from something other than "might makes right".
All that said, I don't mean that firearms aren't at all useful, just that they aren't more useful than other important tools. You for a group to be able to defend itself you will find that basics like picks, shovels, sledgehammers, crowbars, hammer and nails, axes and hatchets, saws, ladders, wheelbarrows etc. are all at least as useful as a firearm.
Generally speaking, making the other guy waste his ammo can be a winning strategy.
Clearly if you're planning to hold a big cache of firearms, then that becomes an incentive for other gangs to go after you, but most of the time, there are plenty of unarmed people out there which present an easier target.
The aim of firearm ownership at the time of civil unrest is to not be an easier target for bad elements. Somehow implying that by owning firearms you become a bigger target than an unarmed household is ridiculously dishonest statement.
Plus, note that we only make it easier to get a permit if you're a sane, law-abiding adult.
