If you have to Meet a Terrorist, would you Rather be in Texas or France?

This is an easy one for me, since Texas is my home and the BEST state in the Union, but I thought it made a good point.-SF

When the next terrorist attack strikes, I don’t want to be in England or France.  I’d rather be in Texas.  Better yet would be South Dakota, Indiana or Alabama.

Let me show you why.

To begin, I looked at this article about the strength of the French and British police force.  France can put 278 thousand armed police on the street in an hour.  That sounds like a lot of police until you realize that France has a population of 66 million.  That is about one armed policeman per 200 people.

The numbers in Britain are one armed policeman per thousand citizens.

For comparison, I looked at some of the larger states in the US.  I combined them to a population of 71 million.  What surprised me is that they had 3.2 million citizens licensed to carry a concealed firearm.

That means these large states had about one armed person in 20, and they are on the street right now in the US.

These armed citizens are in addition to law enforcement.  That means a terrorist is more than 50 times more likely to meet an armed victim in the US than in England.  There is one exception.. and that is if the terrorists attacks a “gun-free zone.”

That raises a few questions.

• Would you rather be in Texas or in England if there were a terrorist attack?
• Why do we continue to provide terrorists with gun-free zones?
• If there were an attack on US soil, why should we disarm and become like Europe?

Read the Original Article at  Ammo-Land