If I'm understanding correctly, the difference is that in #1 anyone you meet may be carrying a gun (but may not be), whereas in #2, you know for sure that everyone (including you) is carrying a gun. Based on that, I'm going to prevent #2. Sure, it provides the certainty #1 doesn't, but #2 would result in way more guns out there than there are now. Also, I imagine there are a lot of people like me who don't want a gun and would be unhappy w/ #2.
Yeah I'm confused on this one. Is "legally" the key word? Or is is "can?"
Technically anybody can carry a gun so I'm thinking for #1 the thing is that the law allowing it is the point. Versus the law possibly compelling it in #2.
I would rather have a law that allows freedom than one that compels an action.
2 comments:
If I'm understanding correctly, the difference is that in #1 anyone you meet may be carrying a gun (but may not be), whereas in #2, you know for sure that everyone (including you) is carrying a gun. Based on that, I'm going to prevent #2. Sure, it provides the certainty #1 doesn't, but #2 would result in way more guns out there than there are now. Also, I imagine there are a lot of people like me who don't want a gun and would be unhappy w/ #2.
Yeah I'm confused on this one. Is "legally" the key word? Or is is "can?"
Technically anybody can carry a gun so I'm thinking for #1 the thing is that the law allowing it is the point. Versus the law possibly compelling it in #2.
I would rather have a law that allows freedom than one that compels an action.
Post a Comment