Would invulnerability end gun-violence?

[DetlefK]

This got me thinking:
http://www.newscientist.com/blogs/nstv/2012/01/stronger-than-steel-spider-silk-skin-takes-a-bullet.html

It looks like, a few decades from now, we can 3D-print and graft bullet-proof skin onto our bodies.

My question is: Would this even matter?
The gist of US gun-violence is the conundrum that you, the good guy, need a gun because the bad guy has a gun, but at the same time as you are good guy, you are a bad guy to somebody else.

If a method of self-defense were developed that would render standard firearms useless, would that mean:
1. The bad guy can no longer hurt you with his puny gun, so you no longer need yours.
or
2. You can no longer hurt the bad guy with your puny gun, so you need AN EVEN BIGGER ONE.

[Loudly]

1. It IS very much like the international arms race of the 1950s and 60s.

Would be nice to learn the lesson of that era.

[Boom Sound 416]

2. #2

Has been proven for centuries