I'm a bit unnerved by hearing that you are a gun owner considering your lack of knowledge about the strict conditions in which a citizen is justified to use a gun by current laws.
Current gun laws in almost every state, even very red states like mine, do not allow a citizen to use their firearm to stop just any crime. There are very strict rules regarding when a gun can even be drawn without the user being charged with a felony offense. Most of these restrictions boil down to that you have the right to protect yourself and your family from immediate threat of bodily harm, but nothing beyond that. Certain versions of the Castle Doctrine go a bit beyond that to include threat to property. This leaves a plethora of situations where law enforcement is needed that an armed citizen is not authorized to intervene.
What you are employing is a straw man argument implying that gun advocates are wanting to authorize citizens to hunt down criminals, when in reality they are arguing for the authorization of citizens to use deadly force to protect oneself, family, and property. Whether this would reduce crime or not is another debate.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm a bit unnerved by hearing that you are a gun owner considering your lack of knowledge about the strict conditions in which a citizen is justified to use a gun by current laws.
Current gun laws in almost every state, even very red states like mine, do not allow a citizen to use their firearm to stop just any crime. There are very strict rules regarding when a gun can even be drawn without the user being charged with a felony offense. Most of these restrictions boil down to that you have the right to protect yourself and your family from immediate threat of bodily harm, but nothing beyond that. Certain versions of the Castle Doctrine go a bit beyond that to include threat to property. This leaves a plethora of situations where law enforcement is needed that an armed citizen is not authorized to intervene.
What you are employing is a straw man argument implying that gun advocates are wanting to authorize citizens to hunt down criminals, when in reality they are arguing for the authorization of citizens to use deadly force to protect oneself, family, and property. Whether this would reduce crime or not is another debate.