It’s not about protecting a hobby. It’s about protecting a right. Claiming that Society can protect it citizenry clearly isn’t true. Society can only punish those who fail to follow the law. If Society could protect it citizenry these shooting never would have happened in the first place.
This brings up an interesting conundrum. “Society” is simply a term to describe “the citizenry.”
If you accept the leftist perspective, then you would need to buy into the proposition that the citizenry needs protection from itself because it cannot be trusted with the lethal means by which it could protect itself. The left proposes that only an elite group of citizens can be trusted with the lethal power and authority to protect the rest of the citizenry.
I suppose that assumption implies that since the majority of the citizenry cannot be trusted they must be controlled since they are fundamentally unable to control themselves.
If true, why on earth would anyone trust the ability of the citizenry to select its representatives in the elite group that governs them? Why not cut out the citizenry altogether and have the elites decide for the citizenry by whom and how they will be governed?
Seems clear that by claiming the citizenry is incapable of deciding by what means they should be permitted to protect their own interests, the implication is that the citizenry is also, by and large, incapable of governing itself.
Totalitarianism is the logical implication, at least, from the leftist perspective, I mean if the citizenry are, indeed, beyond the pale regarding their own security.
Now it is just a matter of convincing a majority that totalitarianism is the way to go. That project seems to be making headway, at this time.
