One argument often put forth by those who would ban handguns is that they are not an effective weapon of self-defense. Curiously these arguments are almost never supported by relevant facts.
If handguns are not effective weapons of self-defense, then why are they issued to nearly every police officer in the country?
In fact, there are thousands of instances each year where handguns are effectively used for self-defense. One happened just yesterday:
"At least four people were killed and 45 others injured when a Palestinian man plowed his bulldozer into two public buses and several cars on a busy street here before being shot dead by Israeli police.
A TV camera captured the enormous earth-mover crushing a vehicle and an off-duty soldier killing the man by shooting him in the head several times. "
In fact, as can be seen here, the off-duty officer climbed onto the moving bulldozer while it was plowing over cars and vans. He held on with one hand and shot the driver in the head with the other, no doubt saving many lives. Query just how effectively the officer could have accomplished this action with a rifle. Possible? Yes. More difficult in dangerous? Certainly.