I get what you are saying, and its kind of true. But not really. Humor me briefly.

Take two people.

1. 5'3" male, 125 lbs
2. 6'4" male, 280 lbs

Without Guns

---

Person 1 wants to rob person 2, most probable outcome? Failure.

Person 2 wants to rob person 1, most probable outcome? Success.

---

With Guns

---

Person 1 wants to rob person 2, most probable outcome? Undetermined.

Person 2 wants to rob person 1, most probable outcome? Undetermined.

---

That is the issue I take with this argument.

You said, "if everyone has guns then no one has guns" and inferred it as a negative statement, but that statement implies equality. Now don't get me wrong, I'm not arguing for a world where everyone has guns. What I am asking is, "Is it right that age, gender, genetics, or a disability should force you to leave yourself at the mercy of society?"

If everyone has the option to uptake a means of defense then Person 2 cannot infringe with impunity, there is a likelihood of consequence even from the unsuspecting frail elderly man.

You may have faith in society. You'll never be attacked by a gang of men, you'll never be a victim of random violence, your house will never be broken into, you will always have a way to escape. Yet if you spend one hour on Google, you will see that random violence is a real way your life could end. You may be fine with that, but those of us who prefer to be prepared for every situation, the ones with snow tires, and cans of food in the basement, regularly inspected fire extinguishers in our house, a carbon monoxide alarm, a well-stocked first aide kit, renter's insurance, and many of the other amenities of life that would be considered normal. Well, we know that there is a chance that we may encounter a mentally unstable individual one day, on the streets, in our house, or going about our day and for all those precautions we take in those other facets of life, it seems ridiculous that city dwellers (apologies for blanket term, no offense intended but there is often an urban/rural distinction of the two sides) who feel uncomfortable around guns wish to dictate and roll back our preparedness for the unpredictable.

Maybe I've added some considerations to your next argument, perhaps not. But even if you've held onto your convictions then perhaps your argument will be bolstered by your new insights into those who support responsible gun ownership and never wish to fire their weapon at anything living aside for sustenance.