|
I disagree that a firearm isn't a tool because, as with a hammer, shovel or saw, it ALL depends on its use. As a law enforcement officer, I don't use it to kill, maim or wound, I use it to STOP an assault, therefore to protect the lives of others. Yes, the immediate use is to harm another, but only to stop an unlawful assault of that immediate person. Just like SWAT is not a killing team, it's a life saving team, so is a firearm. SWAT saves lives by stopping a deadly assault. Sorry, I just see it differently about firearms not being tools. I think they are, just like a baton, OC spray and handcuffs.
Firearms are not easy to use, try hitting someone at 25 yards while under fire, that requires the discipline to aim, steady, maintain a sight picture and roll the trigger. That requires patience, discipline and training. It isn't cowardly when the OTHER person has the same level or more of lethal capability as you do. Tell the cops in Los Angeles that they were cowards for standing toe to toe with men with automatic rifles while they used pistols and fought those guys to the death and won. That isn't cowardice. Courage and cowardice are measured not by the tool, but by the actions of the person bearing the weapons. Knowing when to resist and when resistance would create more problems than solving them takes MORAL courage. Knowing not to draw and fire and instead being a good witness is frequently what I do when I'm armed. I KNOW that I won't use deadly force on a car thief, but just be a good witness because I know that they can make another car and there's no real harm. But if someone tries to take the car by force from another person during a carjacking, I would probably use deadly force if I believe the victim has a high risk of being injured or killed in the assault because there is no easy way to replace the person. Again, the firearm is then used as a tool to SAVE life, not take it.
|