In my recent article at Renewing American Leadership, redefining the “seamless garment” argument for pro-life causes, I mentioned that supporting the personal right to own and carry suitable weapons for self-defense is itself a highly pro-life position.
In the light of the recent tragedy in Norway, Charlie Cooke at NRO has observed that if Norway’s firearms laws had been more like Idaho’s or Utah’s, it is very likely that the death toll would have been far smaller from the lunatic murderer’s killing spree.
It took about 90 minutes for the police to respond effectively. While that’s an atypically long time by US standards, the fact is that the police in the USA almost never “get there” in time to stop murders, even multiple murders. The only people who can stop them are those on the scene.
Those who congratulate themselves for being in favor of making it essentially impossible for private citizens to defend themselves and their loved ones, from some “morally superior” perspective that believes laws against guns save lives, are simply ignorant of the facts regarding gun ownership (including keep and bearing) by law abiding citizens, and have the blood of innocents on their hands wherever they’ve succeeded in imposing such restrictions.
A gun locked up in a safe in a closet does you very little good when you’re attacked in grocery store…. or on an island. 40 states have realized this, and now have “shall issue” laws for concealed carry permits, meaning that people without criminal backgrounds are automatically approved with suitable training. I wonder how long it will be before the rest of the states come around. I wonder how many people who could have defended themselves will have to die before those states change their laws. I also wonder how many people will be attacked who might not have been if the criminals had not been so certain that their intended victims were not armed.
“Gun free zone” equals “target rich environment” for lunatics and just plain killers, who ignore gun laws by definition.
