It’s all about decentralizing self-preservation to the level of the individual. When we put all of our stock into having the government and “authorities” protect us, and take away an individual’s right to protect himself, we are only setting ourselves up for trouble.

Like Ted noted, the gun-free zones apply only to the good guys and gals. Those that are not good or otherwise law-abiding people will find a way to obtain a gun in some way and bring it into the gun-free zone…and then it’s easy pickings on all the good people who are forced to be unarmed.

Although I do not have any stats to back it up, I’d bet that legal gun owners are some of the most responsible, law-abiding members of our society.

There are at least two positives to allowing more gun ownership: (1) more individuals will be able to defend themselves, and (2) would-be perpetrators will be less likely to stage a killing spree knowing that there is a much greater chance of others having the same (or more) fire power as them.