What the discussion of "gun rights" is missing:
1. A segment of the American public doesn't believe that the Police are equipped and/or motivated and/or capable of protecting their safety and lives. They feel that they have to arm themselves for that prospect. And this is despite the Blue Lives Matter and Don't De-Fund The Police.
2. A growing segment of the American public doesn't trust the democratic process. They're either impatient and/or cynical about the slow grinding of legal process in a constitutional republic. They want what they want now, despite the fact that they are in the minority and their whims and wishes won't be easily legislated, if at all. Therefore, they will fall back on threats and violence to change the country to their vision -- and they'll need guns to do that, in order to install an autocratic government that answers to them, whether due to fear or allegiance.
3. Having an arsenal or even one gun can leverage a losing argument if your opponent is unarmed. It could be an argument. It could be a threat to subordinate one's adversary. It can be a form of control. It could be "getting even" when you are otherwise helpless against a real or imaginary enemy. A weapon can win a losing argument even if it leads to death.
They want as many guns as they can afford mainly because of the three theses I posted. It's their idea of "insurance".
= new reply since forum marked as read
