Since the latest Supreme Court nominee won't answer this question, please, allow me. As it stands, the right to keep and bear arms is protected by the 2nd Amendment of our U.S. Constitution. But let's just say for a second there was no Constitution, no piece of paper that guaranteed anything. It still makes sense to me that I should be able to defend myself. If someone threatens my life (or my family, or my property), I have a right to do whatever is necessary to save myself, including killing my attacker, provided there are no other options and no escape. If those that would threaten the lives, security, and privacy of others use deadly force to do so, then those who are threatened must use deadly force as well to protect themselves.
Please listen: I am not a violent person, and I hope and pray that I am never in a position where I have to use deadly force. But I understand and accept that the right to defend oneself (with deadly force if necessary) is a fundamental and individual right. 233 years ago, several brave men sat down and said that the government shall make no law infringing upon that right.
Anyway, don't mind me, I'm just rambling.
No comments:
Post a Comment