I would like to ask a few questions of this paper's readers.
Do you believe all human beings have a natural and inherent right to defend themselves from violent attacks?
I am sure all would say yes, but then add "but nobody needs an assault weapon for that." But I ask, how many bullets might a person reasonably need to stop one or more violent specimens of the most dangerous animal on earth? Some would say 5 to 10 at the most. Well if all humans have the right to defend themselves and the police are human beings with that right, and experts in self defense, we should look to them for the best means to do that. The police departments apparently believe that the answer is 13 to 17 rounds of 9 millimeter as shown by their use of Glocks with large capacity magazines. But, they are the police, is the cry. Yet is not the need to defend human life the same for both? Others will say that weapon is not an assault rifle so you do not need an assault rifle to defend yourself. As to rifles, the experts in the field (the police departments) believe the answer is not less than 30 rounds of 223, as shown by their deployment and use of all the AR-15 (semi-automatic assault rifles).
Is there a difference between police officers' rights to self defense and the rest of the people? After all the police and citizens all have the same reason to defend themselves .... their life.
The answer is "any weapon that is available to law enforcement for self defense should be available to law abiding citizens for the same purpose." They both have the same inherent right to defend themselves from violent attacks.
Nicholas C. Padulo