Quote:
Originally Posted by Urbane Guerrilla
If a situation where you need lethal force were to overtake you -- there is nothing the university could offer, either practicably or extravagantly. Less trouble, actually, for you to handle it rather than saddle the university with some kind of bodyguard obligation.
The power to save life is a worthy power indeed. I do not reject it.
|
Guns also have the power to take lives. If allowing guns saves one life in three years but takes five a year, it is not worth it. You have to look at it from the other side too.
Quote:
|
I'd hardly call this "different" from any other gang-up assault. Such goblin-children need to be shot immediately they attempt such assault. One of them hit would likely be enough, but the self-defense man will try for three minimum. A group with ball bats is readily lethal enough to justify lethal force in self defense. Such nasty people must be rendered pantsfilling scared of ever doing such things again, for clearly their minds have insufficient check on their urge to be brutal. When that is the case, sufficient check must be supplied. While arrest and imprisonment may dissuade them sufficiently, seeing their pals-in-brutality go down in a pink mist dissuades permanently.
|
So if you had a gun and you got attacked by eight guys with guns you would shoot at them? You be dead before you got to guy number two, if that.
Quote:
|
S-a good thing my rights are none of your business.
|
Everyone has equal rights so it is my business. The idea of the right to own guns was to satisfy our biological need of self-preservation. If you can effectively satisfy your biological need of self-preservation without guns, then you do not need guns for self-preservation.