Did anti-gun nuts kill Diane Whipple?
Wherever laws restrict guns, the laws create an incentive for citizens to have vicious dogs that are big enough to take down the meanest, largest home invader or street mugger.
Where laws don?t restrict guns, an owner?s usual incentive is to own a small dog that only serves to scare away an attacker, or to alert the owner, or to assist the owner, so that the owner can defend himself with a gun. An owner?s usual incentive is to have a dog that is smaller than the owner so that the owner can physically control the dog if it attacks an innocent human.
Anti-gun nuts reverse the incentives and cause big dogs to become poor substitutes for guns. Real guns don?t fire themselves. Their triggers have to be pulled. Big dogs fire themselves, and sometimes for no reason, even when the owner is doing everything that is physically possible to stop the dog. Big dogs have legs and can travel independently of any owner.
Anti-gun nuts create another incentive to own guns: for protection against big dogs ? and their owners. Too bad Diane Whipple wasn?t carrying a gun. Libertarians believe that self-defense (and the Second Amendment) is a fundamental human right.
- Rex Curry is an attorney from Tampa.