The original intent of the right to carry for self protection was to protect ones self from the overreach of a Rogue government or another king from
overseas who had expansion ideas.
edit on 727thk22 by 727Sky because: (no reason given)
Meh. It's easy to argue a case when the law is 100% on your side.
Imagine trying to argue the same case, but with the defendants reversed.
"Well, you see Your Honor, my client saw a shady character wearing a gun on his hip as well as other assault weapons including a baton and taser.
The Perp claimed to be a police officer, but my client didn't believe him and asked for his driver's license. The Perp refused to provide the
requested identification. At this point, my client placed the Perp under Citizen's Arrest.
The Perp resisted arrest and my client, in fear for his life, was forced to shoot the Perp. So as you can see, Your Honor, this was clearly a
justified shooting.
What? My client has to lose his job while getting a full pension and can seek employment in the same career field in another town? This is a
travesty! My client will be appealing!"