| I would most certainly support a person’s right to keep a firearm in their house for use in defending their property. I honestly see no possible adverse effects from allowing this. The claim that this access to a firearm could aid someone in a premeditated crime is ridiculous, since if they want a firearm for use in a crime, they will obtain one illegally. After all, why would a criminal care about the legal status of firearms?
Allowing people to carry guns outwith their property is admittedly more problematic, since the access to the firearm is immediate. Hence, the gun could be used in a “heat of the moment” situation. However, that is the gun user’s responsibility and he will deal with the consequences is he uses it improperly. I think an innocent person’s right to defend themselves is more important. My liberty shouldn’t suffer for someone else’s stupidity or lack of self control.
Also, I'm not comfortable with the government having the exclusive right to bear arms. By allowing that, we're giving them far too much power over us, especially in the current political climate, in which, admittedly much further down the line, I can see a well regulated militia becoming necessary. |