Quote:
Originally Posted by DGTess
Please wear a big sign that tells me you don't want me to attempt to save you, in the extremely unlikely event it is necessary.
|
Actually, that may increase their likelihood of surviving the unlikely event.
******************
I find these discussions really interesting because it also boils down to
who should have the right to carry guns to defend themselves. And I am not talking about law abiding citizens vs. motivated offenders. If this topic was simply about having guns to defend yourself in case something happens, the discussion would also consider gun carrying for people whose routine activities place them at higher risk of victimization--people who live in unsafe neighborhoods or attend colleges/universities in relatively unsafe environments. But, no, people in such environments are often encouraged to not access guns (remember the gun buyback programs of years past?) even when they are law abiding citizens. Being pro-guns conveniently tends not to support gun carrying for a subpopulation that has been deemed undesirable (lower socioeconomic status, racial and ethnic minorities, et al.). This topic is really not about gun carrying as a whole. It's about the gun carrying of a certain segment of the population that feels it is being targeted by unsavory characters whether they be mentally unstable or otherwise criminogenic.
Afterall, only this "certain segment" of the population is truly undeserving of such victimization. Everyone else gets what they "deserve" for being in such unsavory environments. I recall how shootings in schools did not raise a concern until these shootings impacted a certain segment of the population. Only then did people start wondering what the hell is going on; and wonder whether greater gun access for law abiding citizens could be part of a solution.
Hybrid Mode
