Is an ordinance required to start a campaign?
Otherwise this actually, instead of promoting guns, opens huge liability holes for homeowners. If one of these "burglars, ne'er-do-wells and other criminal elements" comes on your property, and you don't use their firearm to subdue them, and the city, without need, enacts an ordinance 'asking city denizens' to know, keep, and bear arms, who does the liability then fall to when those "burglars, ne'er-do-wells and other criminal elements" move onto the next homestead? It's a simple move of liability from the police to the citizen in an underhanded move. If that's not the intent, someone will find a way to make it the intent.
I hope that's not codifed or considered in the courts, as this is in no manner whatsoever a 'male' or 'female' issues, but a 'person' issues. I am not even sure of any specific liability where 'head of household' is required to protect all 'members' of the household, or guests, and at no time should it only be a "male head of the household" or that only heads of households may be male.The male head of the household has the responsibility to defend the family from intruders, he also wrote.