Earlier quoted context omitted.
The reason the laws are passed is because of an awareness that the acts they planned to engage in might justifiably result in violent resistance. And this is, again, a very typical pattern. Guns prevent egregious violations of rights. But egregious violations of rights tend to be preceded by confiscation of guns or other forms of gun control, which is generally not seen as sufficient justification for violent resista…
> Guns prevent egregious violations of rights. But egregious violations of rights tend to be preceded by confiscation of guns or other forms of gun control, which is generally not seen as sufficient justification for violent resistance. Again, if true, that clearly undermines the claim that guns prevent violations of rights.
I'm not much of a gun person, but in looking at the history of guns and the quite ambiguous information on positive impacts of control - I've become not only more understanding, but also in support, of their efforts to maintain their rights to arm themselves.