Have you ever reade about a justified shoot coming back as a win in civil court by the perp who was shot? I haven't reade anything. Yea, there are things here, and there regarding freak occurrences, but those are rare enough to still shoot to defend yourself. Then again, would you rather lose your life, or lose your fancy house or fancy car?2. We've all read stories of justified shoots in other states where the LAC got raked over the legal coals by the local prosecutor. The thought occurs to me that this is one of the tactics to make the individual citizen more dependent upon the government. Which leads to #3.
3. If citizens can be discouraged from providing for their own defense, this provides an excuse for even bigger government, more taxes, and less freedom. It also provides a rationale for removing firearms from private ownership, "You don't need this to defend yourself. We now have enough police to defend you without you taking matters into your own hands."
Republicans are the ones who don't want there to be public defenders for individuals charged with crimes. There will never be enough police to warrant no longer needing to defend your life.
Nice thoughts.Am I just a fuzzy-thinking old man or does anyone else think these thoughts have any merit?