There will always be some people who are uncomfortable around guns.

This is not a moral failing on their part. Sometimes it's a trauma response. Other times it may be the result of an honest assessment of themselves. I honestly don't care why they're uncomfortable around them just so long as they don't use it to justify trying to take away my right to have, carry, and use them.

Unfortunately, far too many do.

They want to restrict what people can and can't do based on their feelings. That's bad. What's worse, though, is how they keep ignoring the cold, hard facts in the process.

For example, there's this discussion of open carry in Texas.

On January 1st, 2016, the Texas Legislature implemented its open carry law, allowing Texas residents to openly carry handguns in public places. This solidified Texas’s deep-rooted commitment to upholding our Second Amendment: “A well-regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” However, this has now ignited some intense discussions about whether this law is beneficial for the public. The question is how Texas can protect its people's rights while also ensuring the safety of its communities.

The Texas gun law presents two opposing sides: one emphasizes self-defense and deterrence, while the other is paranoia and misuse. While both sides have their arguments, it is important to find the facts from these discussions.

In Texas, it is common theory among those who choose to open-carry or concealed-carry that if they are armed, criminals will be less likely to harass them; if they were to be harassed, they would be able to properly defend themselves or potentially someone else from an attacker. This, however, causes critics to state that the influx of guns in public creates a higher state of paranoia within communities. Due to the firearms potentially being in the wrong hands at the wrong time, minor issues can escalate into dangerously deadly encounters.

The problem is that the critics--the people who cite flawed gun studies all the time--can't produce a single shred of evidence that people who are lawfully open-carrying have ever escalated a minor issue into anything deadly.

There's no evidence for it at all. We know there isn't because if there was, they'd be citing it for decades upon decades until we could recite the entire study off the top of our heads, just like they do with every other bit of so-called research that supports their position.

They don't have any, so they just say, "Well, it could happen."

Sure, it could, but what happens far more often is...nothing.

People who are openly carrying firearms don't get bothered, don't have their guns taken from them to be used against them, don't get angry and kill innocent people, or any of the other things that could potentially happen. I'm not a huge fan of it for various reasons, but it's also not the end of the world, either.

See, I'm fine with them being uncomfortable because they're concerned these things can happen. Fear isn't rational but it's understandable. We're all afraid of something, after all.

What's not fine is expecting me to put myself at risk over your fears.

Really, though, that's the gun control argument in a nutshell.