The bureaucrats mean well, they are just trying to protect the majority of voters. Simple logic. Someone was hurt with a knife. If the perp didn't have a knife, it wouldn't have happened; so ban the carry of knives. What evades both the politician and the voter is that the perp if he is willing to hurt someone with a knife he certainly is not afraid of the no carry law and can get a knife. He also is emboldened by the fact that the law has disarmed his victim. My knife is a tool but I don't mind the fact that a would be attacker knows I might have/use it. I am not a hazard to anyone by carrying it.I refuse to let a beaurocrat tell me I cant defend myself.
I think it unfortunate that this country is rapidly following others into a passive defense strategy both as a nation and as an individual. Cover up, run, dial 911. What is happening to fight back? An armed society is a polite society. How many accidental gun deaths could we tolerate to compensate for the deaths as a result of 9-11. If there were 4 or 5 legal, concealed guns on board, I doubt any of it would have happened. I'll go further and say I doubt it would have been tried, maybe not even considered.
And enough about the majority wanting stricter gun laws for, as we know, a pure democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on what's for dinner. The older I get the more I admire the constitution and fear what is happening to it.
Last edited: