Many others have hit on this matter of false equivalence. Being concerned that a pizza delivery man may have a weapon somewhere about their person obviously reveals much more about the author than either guns or their legal carry. I wonder if the author would be just as worried about if the driver were HIV positive or not (that can kill you, too, you know, but is of marginal value when it comes to self protection).
What so many anti-carry advocates fail to consider is that there are basically four groups of people:
1. bad guys who are going to illegally carry and are likely to use their weapon as a tool of force
2. non-bad guys who are going to illegally carry but only use their weapon as a tool of defense
3. law abiding citizens who are not going to carry because they cannot legally do so
4. law abiding citizens who have to optin to carry because they have been trained, vetted and authorized by competent authority and who will only use their weapon as a tool of defense under prescribed circumstances meeting the law’s standard for application of deadly force
Now, which of those groups are the only ones affected by no-carry rules or laws and which of them would you prefer to be armed (“none” is not an acceptable answer since groups 1 and 2 should, by default, be assumed to be armed)?
