So the Right to Self-Defense—among other legitimate reasons to keep and bear arms—is "outdated" and misunderstood"?
Apparently, if some criminal thug attacks you or your family, you're supposed to defeat him in hand-to-hand combat—thus making it a question of who's the better fighter?
A Free Person shouldn't be allowed to use a contemporary projectile weapon to defend himself or his loved ones?
My God! What breathtaking totalitarian ignorance! In a Free Society, such a ridiculous notion—leaving a peaceable citizen and his family at the mercy of a criminal assailant (or, of course, the government)—is Tyrannical on its face. Nothing could be more antithetical to individual Liberty, Public Safety, and Natural Rights.
People who believe such nonsense—and try to impose it on Free Men—should be met with whatever force necessary to prevent the adoption of such abject Slavery.
Free Men can own guns. Slaves&—who are at the mercy of their governments or criminal assailants—can't.
It really drives home how utterly emasculated nearly all Europeans are—supposed men who would leave their family and themselves completely defenseless against violent attack. It's absolutely shameful, and I pray to God that We the People never allow ourselves to be deprived of such a basic right—the right to individual and collective self defense—including the use of projectile weapons, which are a great equalizer against arbitrary violence.
It just astounds me that anyone could tolerate being forced into a position of sch submission and powerlessness...
I hear you and agree.
It also astounds me that a former Supreme Court Justice with all his faculties, even though a liberal one can really believe that.
I'd be interested to know if Justice Stevens is having issues with some form of dementia.