Just a few questions. Are you on any medication? Do you have any physical limitations? What would a psychologist say about your general mental health or ability to function in stressful situations? Tell me about your temper? Have you ever had any problems controlling your anger? Any criminal convictions? Since I don't know your ability to shoot or your command of the laws pertaining to the lawful use of deadly force, I'll reserve judgment. When is the last time you demonstrated any degree of proficiency with the weapon in front of a certified firearms instructor? Where does the use of a knife fall in the UoF continuum? Also, what is your plan to secure the weapon when you poop? Yes, that's actually a serious question. How are you insured in the event of an unintentional discharge injuring or killing a third party? Just ask a career cop...desk pops somehow happen. Also, I hope you didn't drink alcohol. Finally, if you do get into the John Wayne moment you seem to be looking for...how well are you trained in weapons retention? Finally, while you're playing shoot em up in the middle of a restaurant how are you identifed so responding cops don't shoot you? Just curious. I like to have the facts before endorsing such matters. After all, as your neighbor and fellow restaurant patron, I might be on your grand jury one day.
Those are all valid points in this debate. How ever, none of them can matter IF we are a free nation, a nation of laws, of constitutional limited GOVERNMENT.
The constitution is not about asking those questions of we, the people and then having our government be arbiter of those questions including deciding sanctions and limitations. It is supposed to be we, the people, asking the questions and using the constitution to apply those limits and sanctions on the government.
As uncomfortable as it may be to know that folks are 'allowed' to keep and bear arms as a right and might not have much in the way of formal training, it is still a RIGHT.
I will tell you this, also; if folks who were concerned about guns focused on what you are saying, rational, reasoned qualifications aimed at improving public safety, I, and most pro gun folks, would be all for it. However, the simple fact of the matter is that anti gun folks are just that, anti gun, and I do NOT want them asking any of the questions, making any of the rules or creating any of the power to violate my right to keep and bear arms. Not only do we know it will NOT improve public safety, it WILL create one more layer, one more process, one more precedent on how to go about attacking other rights.
One other point; If I were dropping my kid off at Sandy Hook, I'd rather they have even the slim chance of some low skill dad who happened to be carrying that day than the chance those kids actually had in a 'gun free' zone.
Which brings me to yet one more point; if folks concerned with guns embraced the obvious, a good guy with a gun, someone trained and skilled as you are suggesting, and promoted that we need MORE folks like that, teachers, administrators, armed officers on duty at schools, malls, movie theaters, in addition to the clear benefit of having many good, 'qualified' and trained folks out 'there' the desire, the concern of people who are 'qualified' by their constitutional rights to keep and bear, may feel a whole lot less more concern and need to exercise those rights.
