by David Bowman

January 13, 2002

KeepAndBearArms.com -- Do you believe that the right to defend one's life is a natural, inherent right? Or is it a privilege that is conferred upon a populace by its rulers? In other words, does an individual have an absolute right to exist? Where does that right come from?

Is the purpose of the second article of the Bill of Rights (the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution) to confer a right? Or is it there to protect a pre-existing right?

If you believe that self-defense is a natural right, do you believe that this right only exist for selected individuals, at selected locations, at selected times? In other words, do you believe that this is some type of "conditional" right? I mean are there circumstances, or places that should limit the ability of an innocent person to respond to an imminent threat of violence that places said innocent person's life in jeopardy? 

Do you believe that the criminal element in our society, for the most part, play by the same "rules" as law-abiding citizens? If you don't believe they do, what, in your opinion, would you say the reason is? Are the current "rules" wrong? Do we need more "rules"? Or just different ones? 

What law or laws, in your opinion could or should be passed to assure, in an absolute way, that no innocent person would ever lose their life or be injured due to an act of criminal violence?

Do you believe that it is the function and duty of the various law enforcement agencies to protect individuals from the dangers of death and mayhem at the hands of a violent, criminal element? If yes, do you believe they are doing a good job? What criteria would you use to assess their performance? Is it enough that a majority of persons is protected, in a general sense, and that it must simply be taken on faith that a number of persons will go unprotected, and that's O.K., because no "system" is perfect? If you do not believe it is the function of law enforcement to provide individuals with protection, then whose responsibility is it? 

Is it O.K. for government to restrict individual access to a well proven method of self-protection which, in the face of a lethal assault, might enable that person to save his or her own life, or that of another innocent victim? Does a United States Citizen have the right to travel, unrestricted, to or from any State in the Union? Should a law-abiding citizen be able to protect his or her life while in their own home yet not be allowed the same means of protection when away from the home? 

These are fundamental questions. Each one should be easy to answer in your own mind. What about the elected leaders of your community? Your state? Do you know what they believe? Are you doing all you can to support office holders or candidates that believe the same way you do? Do you care?