New York Times Editorial Off Base on What is Reasonable
Posted by FirearmsTruth on March 13, 2010 · Leave a Comment
Clearly some of the more liberal minded in the media think “reasonable” is being unable to own a gun in one’s home for self-defense. The New York Times editorial proves that point:
“After serious setbacks to sensible gun control, the top court in Massachusetts on Wednesday made it clear that the Second Amendment does not bar states from protecting children and others against the risk posed by unsecured guns in the home.”
Yes, “others” are protected, but those “others” could include those who break into your house to inflict harm on you! How can you have a gun for self-defense if you have to keep it secured? While we agree it is a good idea to keep a gun secured when there are children around, what about those with no kids and who have had their homes broken into in the past? Are they more secure, or are those “others” just safer during a home invasion?
