Reply #34: But one wasn't a "fine, intelligent gentlemen...," prima facie... [View All]

[SteveM]

Your premise rests upon a utopian scheme of prohibition. I can understand this. From complete prohibition we draw the most haughty senses of morality and compassion; so let's agree this is a more likely reality.

Argument of entrance/egress in a store (the rationale for which is usually security-related) does not justify confrontation, let alone guns; yet this charged-felon chose to pull a gun on two (as far as the arrestee was concerned) "unarmed" store employees. This is the "road rage" scenario CCW opponents always cite; this is the "blood in the streets" or "wild west" scripts gun-registration advocates slap. But what happened? The two store-owners took completely defensible action by properly brandishing their weapons. (You would agree at this point the action was defensible?) Further, they forced this armed and dangerous man to back out of the store and take cover. Here, the arrestee fired on the store. Still, the store owners did not fire, but persuaded the arrestee to give up. Also prima facie: the two store owners were quite humanitarian.

It is pointless to pose questions of logic or preference based on utopian hypotheticals.