Posted on 12/28/2004 3:23:29 PM PST by Tolerance Sucks Rocks
Bookmark.
There's no evidence whatsoever that such laws INCREASE CRIME either.....
Bottom line: policy arguments come and go. The fact is that a law abiding citizen has an inalienable right to self defense, including the right to carry. That should be enough for most people.
Exactly.
Except that it doesn't matter what is enough for most people. If my inalienable right to self defense includes using a gun to save my life then no person or group of people have the right -- nor should they have the power -- to force me to be defenseless. 911 is slow crime follow-up. Martial arts don't stop a criminal's speeding bullet.
And if I were a criminal it would be well within my mental make up to steal a gun to commit other crimes.
If a politician or bureaucrat doesn't trust me with a gun I cannot trust them to wield the power of government. They and their 911 can't defend me in the few moments that most violent crimes occur.
If they're going to force me to forego my inalienable right to self defense then should I be a victim of a violent crime they will be held accountable for failing to be there to defend me.
If they proclaim that they criminal is to fault because he didn't abide the law I will agree. Yet that is besides the point that the politician and bureaucrat failed to defend me during the crime. Though they did insure that I'd be defenseless during the crime.
Bottom line: politicians and bureaucrats know full well that they cannot be there to defend a victim during a violent crime. When they vote for gun control laws they know full well that they will be leaving victims defenseless.
They are parasites more destructive than the criminals they proclaim to be protecting their constituents from.
lol... yeah well it'll sure surprise a lot of muggers
Sooo... I think you are saying that if I drive into the city of Charlotte, NC, and some coke-head wants my Beemer, and breaks the windo, that I cannot put a few 9mm rounds through his head?
Just make sure your life IS in danger and the wounds aren't in the back of the head lol
Read my tagline and reflect on the Law of Unintended Consequences.
Actually, he committed a crime by doing an anchor shot on one of his attackers.
"No credible evidence" just means they choose not to believe what evidence their is.
Actually, he committed a crime by doing an anchor shot on one of his attackers.
He committed a crime in New York City just by having the gun. If I'd been on that jury he would have at least gotten a hung jury
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.