Civilian carry lacks a straightforward answer.
If you find yourself in a situation where an assailant has a weapon, you would definitely want to possess a firearm and be proficient in its use. However, it’s essential to consider the likelihood of such situations occurring and the associated responsibilities and challenges of gun ownership.
For example, the leading cause of pediatric trauma deaths has shifted from car accidents to firearm-related incidents.
Moreover, even with training, high-stress situations where your life is in danger can overwhelm your body, causing your stress levels to surpass manageable limits. This can result in a loss of fine motor skills and the capacity to maintain proper focus, potentially leading to harm to innocent individuals more than the assailant or getting you to take unreasonable action.
Finally, in a shooting incident, it’s possible that responding law enforcement may not immediately identify you as the innocent party. As has occurred in past cases, they could mistake you for the assailant, putting you at risk of injury or even death.
However, when reflecting on history, including the pogroms and persecution faced by the Jewish community, there’s an argument for firearm ownership and training. Nowdays, social media can quickly incite conflict, and there may be more individuals with malicious intent than law enforcement can handle. This can result in harm to entire communities.
Consider the recent incident at a Russian airport as a real-life illustration of a ruthless mob targeting Jews without any apparent reason. Similar occurrences have taken place in the past, highlighting the importance of preventing such incidents in the future through appropriate measures, including self-defense training and firearm ownership.
As I initially mentioned, there are valid arguments on both sides of the spectrum.