Here’s another example , more articulate than most but no more mentally healthy:
I live in CA. Here we have the potential for earthquakes, wildfires, and other natural disasters much like other places. There have been times in recent memory where due to whatever circumstances, temporary local civil unrest occurs. The LA riots were a formative event for me. When the police were unable or unwilling to intercede, the people who were able to defend themselves did so against multiple persistent threats at range. Those who could not either lost everything, were tortured and killed, or were lucky to avoid the wrath of the mob. If services are disrupted, like, water, power, gas, roads, police, etc. I’m prepared to ride out whatever temporary thing is causing a problem and that includes repelling threats. Semi-automatic center fire rifles are the best and most effective way to do that. The AR-15 platform fits these requirements quite well. Less experienced firearm users like my wife could achieve a level of effectiveness with an AR-15 platform rifle that would take comparatively longer than with a pistol. Its ease of use and effectiveness are what make the weapon system appealing. I’ve said before that anything that is effective for defense will likely also be effective for offense and this is true here. Of course, at any given time the rifles rest tucked away in the safes, harming no one.
“Of course” :rolleyes:
I would be okay with making it harder to obtain firearms, more rigor on screening, more aggressive pursuit disarming those with certain mental illnesses, treating threats and earlier signs of violence more harshly (remember when bullying was often overlooked but now it’s not?), expanding how and when a person can be considered prohibited, and a more expansive way to disarm those who become prohibited.
It’s those *other *people with mental health problems, the *other *law non-abiders, whose weapons need to be defended against or removed. Never those of the paranoid fantasist.