(Disclaimer: There appears to be some formal "RKBA Group" here. I have no affiliation therewith.)
Man, I hate the stories of rebels/gangs rolling through civilian populations and hacking people to bits with machetes. How many times have we all read that?
And how many times does that ever happen if there are large numbers of folks standing around with rifles, or even fully automatic rifles, ready and able to act in self defense!
But how many times does effective Third World communal self defense ever happen? And do we ever even read about self defense in the Third World by a smattering of folks armed "merely" with handguns?
I once wrote some decades ago about tasking CIA Agents with broadly (clandestinly?) arming all manner, as many as possible, of third world civilians with an effective means of self defense. And now I'm wondering (even through the non-clarity of hindsight) if there is any way to know the net efficacy/detriment of such a Right to Keep and Bear Arms approach.
One thing about our Second Amendment is that it's nothing if it's not expandable/ exportable. To me, any and every truly Fundamental Human Right, by definition is and must be.
I notice, or at least know I believe, that life here is hugely non-dangerous, at least compared to the every day reality facing hundreds of millions, or even billions, of our fellow living humans. The difference here between THE RKBA, and not, is, on the grand scale, inconsequential. Not so, of course, everywhere.
So then I try to ascertain, in our society, principled differentiation of our concern for our "Firearm Rights", and the seemingly, nonimportant equivalent rights of our billions of planetary brothers and sisters.
Or maybe I'm missing something and there is broad based support here for everyone else knowing and enjoying the same RKBA freedom that we enjoy/so adamantly fight for. But, for whatever reason, I've never once seen matters expressed that way.
But, anyway, to facilitate the public discussion, I would appreciate being able to posit the following question: "In the bigger picture, in the grand scale of things, and fully recognizing that this discussion bears on the life or death outcomes of, at a minimum, millions of our fellow humans, would arming everyone, EVERYONE, be better or worse than the status quo"?
Some millions would die, amd some millions would survive, and I, for the life of me, am simply incapable of balancing the ledger!
Thank you for your help.