Gun sales surge ahead of jury's Ferguson decision

[branford]

109. I have no problem with people lawfully protecting themselves regardless of whether there is a riot.

The laws of self-defense do not change because of a riot.

Of course, this works in both directions. If someone is threatened, particularly by a violent mob, they are entitled to defend themselves, and a firearm is the most effective tool when presented with multiple assailants. Often a shoot need not even be fired to deter aggression. However, no one can just shoot at protesters, even if they are generally violent, unless they present a contemporaneous and serious risk to an actual person.

I'm hardly surprised by the increase in gun purchases in and around St. Louis and Ferguson. If you're a local shop owner or resident, or simply watched some of the rioting after the Brown shooting, no less remember incidents like the L.A. Riots, why wouldn't you want the means to protect yourself, family and friends. If you or someone else is seriously threatened, you may act. Otherwise, the gun will not be used. I would be similarly unsurprised if purchases of fire extinguishers have also increased in response to the upcoming grand jury announcements. Preparedness is not necessarily racism.