Omg, the stupidity of the argument that the public must not be able to carry tools of self-defense when they are in areas of greater population. Areas of greater population will have a higher number of bad people per square mile.
What happens at 3am when someone needs to travel outside in a part of Baltimore or NYC when the population density is still there, but many are sleeping inside of buildings versus walking around outside. It's no surprise that a number of robberies and assaults happen when there are less people that are visible.
And the solicitor general arguing that law enforcement will protect people. Well then we would have zero robberies or assaults, right? Bad guys are smart enough to pick isolated targets when the police aren't there. Yes, the density of police might be greater in these areas, but there's no blanket saturation. Definitely not in Baltimore, and even not in NYC.
Would this person would blithely walk outside in a dangerous part of town at a time when less people are present on the streets? Of course not. One, she has resources to live in safer areas. Second, she might not need to work or venture out at these times. So yes, she's safe. But those that she's working to deny the right of self-protection using a gun might not have these luxuries, might not be able to outrun the bad guys, and might not have the physical strength to defend themselves.
What happens at 3am when someone needs to travel outside in a part of Baltimore or NYC when the population density is still there, but many are sleeping inside of buildings versus walking around outside. It's no surprise that a number of robberies and assaults happen when there are less people that are visible.
And the solicitor general arguing that law enforcement will protect people. Well then we would have zero robberies or assaults, right? Bad guys are smart enough to pick isolated targets when the police aren't there. Yes, the density of police might be greater in these areas, but there's no blanket saturation. Definitely not in Baltimore, and even not in NYC.
Would this person would blithely walk outside in a dangerous part of town at a time when less people are present on the streets? Of course not. One, she has resources to live in safer areas. Second, she might not need to work or venture out at these times. So yes, she's safe. But those that she's working to deny the right of self-protection using a gun might not have these luxuries, might not be able to outrun the bad guys, and might not have the physical strength to defend themselves.
