People, I would like to chime in on something here.
Let’s look at a situation.
Take a baddie named Jack. Jack’s life is hard. He grew up and was denied bacon throughout his childhood, prompting him to become moody and violent. In order to express his disgust and hatred of society, he decides to buy a gun, legal or otherwise, and go on a shooting spree.
The big day arrives. Jack straps on his guns. he checks his ammo. He writes his note explaining his reasons.
He drives to his predetermined location. Suddenly, he freezes.
His carefully planned event is supposed to take place in a Gun Free zone! Jack sighs, and turns around, and goes home to mope, because obviously even though he is about to become a mass murderer, he can’t use his guns to kill people in a Gun Free Zone.
Wait. No- no that’s not what happens, is it?
Actually, what Jack thinks when he sees the Gun Free Zone is, “Perfect. Now I’ll be the only one with a gun.”
Because in real life, criminals don’t follow the laws.
Normal citizens do, though.
So now, because normal people were keeping the law, they’re now defenseless against a psychopathic murderer.
The Morals of the Story:
1. Criminals don’t obey laws. That’s what makes them criminals, guns being legal or not will matter very little to them.
2. What’s better? Let both the patriotic citizen have a gun as wells as the law breaking criminal? Or make the citizen use his fists (which can be a great disadvantage over long distances).
3. Even the idea of an armed public will make a criminal think twice.
4. Let people eat bacon.