CathyInBlue
Grandmaster
First, I've been having more vocabulary brain farts than usual of late. That first (italicized and) bolded point has the word "defend" where I meant "apprehend".
Second, it's not really a question of relative proportion now, as the politico-legal situation stands now. That argument is the one the anti-gunners use against the AR-15 platform. Since the founders never had them, they can't be protected by the Second Amendment, which doesn't protect unusual firearms or firearms that are not in common use. This argument says that if the situation is not already common, it can never be allowed to become common. Since non-LEOs using force to stop criminal conduct against them get hauled away on trumped up charges with LEOs should always have a monopoly on force, and because LEOs have a monopoly on force, non-LEOs should never use force to stop criminal conduct against them. It's tautological. Bring down the barriers to people policing themselves and the proportions will change.
Second, it's not really a question of relative proportion now, as the politico-legal situation stands now. That argument is the one the anti-gunners use against the AR-15 platform. Since the founders never had them, they can't be protected by the Second Amendment, which doesn't protect unusual firearms or firearms that are not in common use. This argument says that if the situation is not already common, it can never be allowed to become common. Since non-LEOs using force to stop criminal conduct against them get hauled away on trumped up charges with LEOs should always have a monopoly on force, and because LEOs have a monopoly on force, non-LEOs should never use force to stop criminal conduct against them. It's tautological. Bring down the barriers to people policing themselves and the proportions will change.