The gun-control proposition:
If no one carried a gun then there would be no need for any individual to carry one, concealed or not.
The anti gun-control argument to that proposition:
In the absence of guns, there is still violence perpetrated on victims (rape, battery, attempted murder, etc.). Victims have the right to defend themselves and, especially weaker or elderly ones, the right to do it with something practical, easy to use, and with guaranteed stopping power like a gun.
How do I counter that argument convincingly?
2007-10-27
07:29:29
·
9 answers
·
asked by
Dan M
1
in
Law & Ethics