Having spoke to the new Mayor numerous times, and knowing that she is a huge supporter of the NFOA
If this is true, great...but never should a politician, they should be watched over with a magnifying glass.
There are many examples of politicians doing things to placate (or play off people's emotions for what they want....Johnson, Bush(jr), etc.) people while behind the scenes they move to destroy them.
I like it. Anything that desensitizes the general populace to the idea of concealed carry is a good thing.
Yes and no...it shouldn't be desensitizing, it should be about educating them to realize what the real problems are. That objects are not the problem and that the so called controls on the objects are actually controls on people.
Not desensitize, but knowledge that someone with an object is not the problem, that it is the person they must look at. It should be the norm to see weapons. Basically to where they want to see people armed.
Desensitizing is very bad thing for any purpose.
(Though, I do suppose that is what you are actually meaning.)
In essence, the Sheriffs, Deputies, Police Officers, etc are YOUR paid, armed protective service.
Not so actually. They are paid to enforce laws, but they supposed to enforce certain laws over others when there are conflicts in the law (i.e. Constitution enforced over all other laws). They are not paid to protect us, nor would it be a good idea for us to do so or think so. When you outsource your personal safety and protection to someone else, you have just given that person control over you.
The individual is the
ONLY one that can protect themselves, no one else can or be required to do so (btw - requiring someone to do so would be a violation of that persons rights...if that person chooses to do so, that is their choice...and no one has any right to put someone else in danger for their sake).
After all, for a crime to occur at all, there has to be 2 individuals involved (property is an extension of the individual). Who is already at the scene from the very beginning? The victim. Law enforcement are never and can never be there, except of course on the off chance they are the victim or randomly walk onto the scene as things kick off.
Law enforcement (and government in general) are pure reactionary, as it should be. They can only get involved after the fact. Giving them pro-active powers would mean we no longer or soon will no longer have any rights at all.
"Security/Safety provided by another, is nothing more than tyranny breaking in through the back door."
Remember: Governments loves crime, it gives them a way to push laws/regulations to take control over the people. It is in government's best interest to keep crime levels high and people in fear. That is yet another reason why the better armed the populace is, the safer the populace is.
