You are being downvoted because people disagree. I'm not sure how I feel about the downvote button being used this way, but I also disagree with you. I wish that instead of downvoting, people will just explain their positions.

For my part:

Personally owned firearms are used for defense far more often than for aggression. The easiest scenario to picture is the one in which a sidearm is merely revealed (rather than brandished or fired) in order to deter an attacker.

The vast majority of successful uses of guns for personal protection do not involve discharge. I think it's reasonable to call these purely "defensive" uses.

I agree that, on its face, discharging a firearm with the intent to kill or injure another person is offensive. However, this is an over-simplification of the (largely positive, in my experience) role that firearms play in our society.

A sufficient distribution of concealed carry permits creates (or at least can create) a sort of herd immunity against certain types of violent crime.

Volunteer open carry provides an example of how protective force might be delegated in a community without the need for a police force.

A culture of firearms safety and training, along with widespread ownership of effective tactical arms, can cause an entity, even a state actor, to opt against brute-force repression of a community.

If you want a crash course in firearm culture amidst unending dedication to peace and compassion, check out Porcupine Festival. (And for what it's worth, there are also very intense tech talks and hacking sessions that will blow your mind).