A START to the gun control 'conversation'. While I disagree with much of what is said, the post does at least begin to address the issues. Here is what I think is the crux of the argument:

... America would be safer if more people were armed. To me this is more "interesting" than convincing. I can see the appeal of such reasoning on the individual level. Jeff Goldberg describes the Long Island Railroad shooting in 1993 and says that if he had been on that train he would rather have been armed than not. "My instinct was that if someone is shooting at you, it is generally better to shoot back than to cower and pray." Undeniably. But ... I don't see how this scenario extends to a policy that makes us safer overall.

Liberals believe society is (better, safer, fairer) when individuals are limited; conservatives believe the converse, that society is (better, safer, fairer) when individuals are free. Those are positions for which it is difficult to find compromise.