Wednesday, December 3, 2008

Right to Bear Arms (St. Louis Alderman calls on residents to get armed)

Police did not immediately return requests for comment. Chief Dan Isom told the St. Louis Post-Dispatch he understands Troupe's frustration but doesn't support citizens arming themselves.

Carrying guns, he said, is not a "recipe for a less violent community."


This is the response of a police chief whose department supposedly cannot provide protection for the community. See St. Louis alderman calls on residents to get armed

1. Protection is a biblical responsibility for the head of the home (and for individuals).

2. If what was reported is true, that "there was nothing he [/the police department] could do to protect" the citizens and community; if the chief does not support citizens arming themselves, then HOW are they supposed to protect themselves? Are they supposed to just become defenseless targets?

3. While it's true that vigilantism is to be cautioned against and headed off, that does not deny the right and responsibility to legally provide protection for oneself and one's family. If the statement is to ward off this type of environment and mindset, the government then also has responsibility and need to provide citizens with information regarding how they plan to provide protection, ...which even when given, does not negate the responsibility of citizens to ensure their ability to provide protection, and to purchase instruments toward that end if deemed desirable or necessary toward that end.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Why I believe in baptizing babies (condensed version)

I grew up with the traditional Baptist view, typically referred to as " believers baptism ". It is theologically known as credobap...