|
Not wishing to enter the constitutional side of argument but if the, Right to Bear Arms is justified by self protection, then this argument is flawed. If people can own a gun to protect themselves, how come all those who have been killed were not able to protect themselves?
Perhaps the justification of "self protection" should include: 1) the need to carry the weapon with you at all times, 2) have it loaded, 3)cocked, and 4) with the safety catch off. This is obviously ridiculous, so therefor the whole justification seems ridiculous.
In the Wild West days, obviously people in remote areas without a law officer, did need arms for protection, but now, surely our protection is catered for by a police force internally and the military externally. It is in this country, Australia, why is it different in the USA?
|