Well, if self defense is prohibited in parks (prohibited only for the law-abiding) then you’ll know right where to find a higher concentration of criminals.
This’d get straightened out pretty quickly if depriving a person of their lawfully possessed means of defense incurred an obligation to actively provide security in that area equal to or exceeding what that person could provide themselves.
Especially if the usual means of diffusing responsibility (the committee, council or other body) is invalidated and each member thereof is individually treated as having complete and simultaneous liability.
Their theory is that a publicly funded defense force (i.e. police) provide such security by some form of ‘economy of scale’. As they say on Wikipedia, [citation needed].
February 1st, 2018 at 7:52 pm
Well, if self defense is prohibited in parks (prohibited only for the law-abiding) then you’ll know right where to find a higher concentration of criminals.
February 1st, 2018 at 9:30 pm
This’d get straightened out pretty quickly if depriving a person of their lawfully possessed means of defense incurred an obligation to actively provide security in that area equal to or exceeding what that person could provide themselves.
Especially if the usual means of diffusing responsibility (the committee, council or other body) is invalidated and each member thereof is individually treated as having complete and simultaneous liability.
Their theory is that a publicly funded defense force (i.e. police) provide such security by some form of ‘economy of scale’. As they say on Wikipedia, [citation needed].