Firearms needed for self-defense, avoiding crime
I was not surprised by Tom Toles' cartoon in the Aug. 7 paper suggesting that the Second Amendment had no value because Americans have never had to use their defensive firearms to overthrow a tyrant.
Toles and The Washington Post have long taken an ostrich-like view of firearms, and what this view leaves out of the equation is the frequency with which law-abiding Americans use their guns to thwart crime.
Hundreds of thousands of times every year armed Americans defend themselves against criminals. Typically, when an intended victim introduces a firearm, the criminal retreats and no shots are fired. Still, a few thousand times a year, Americans shoot and kill criminal attackers.
This is not vigilantism, but self-defense. A cost/benefits analysis of firearms in America, such as that presented by John R. Lott Jr. in his More Guns, Less Crime, reveals the true picture of guns in America.
The one-sided, politically motivated propaganda carried on by The Washington Post and its editorial cartoonist is deeply flawed.
Washington Post cartoonist Tom Toles' Aug. 7 presentation representing his contempt for the Second Amendment, is way off base.
There are daily events across the U.S. in which the presence of a firearm in fact prevents a situation from deteriorating further and a crime is prevented. Such events typically go unreported in the media.
I would suggest that if Toles and his ilk find it so distasteful living under the provisions of the U.S. Constitution, that he live elsewhere and see what his drivel nets him then.