How would legal gun ownership protect citizens from a terrorist attack?

originally posted by: seagull
a reply to: namelesss

Predominately, the gun is a penis substitute, an ego prop, a false sense of security. Which is, I guess, better than no 'sense of security' for people who need it!

A penis substitute, eh? Ego prop? False sense of security? Wow, did you come up with those all by yourself???

So lacking in argument you stoop to playground insults? Well played, nameless, well played.

Ad-hom attacks and belittling does not refute any of what I said (perhaps a bit hyperbolically, but that don't bite).
If one doesn't see the truth in those words mirrored right in their denial, one would seldom get excited enough to reply, emotionally and fallaciously, as you have just done.
Does the shoe fit?
Was that an 'ouch' I heard?