fb-pixel
LETTERS

Self-defense is not immoral, and neither is arming oneself

Lines formed at Heritage Gun & Coin Co. in West Warwick, R.I., on March 16.
Lines formed at Heritage Gun & Coin Co. in West Warwick, R.I., on March 16.Matthew Lee/The Boston Globe

In his response to Jeff Jacoby’s recent column about rising gun ownership among Blacks (”Must self-preservation be the top priority?” Letters, June 29), Remy Trahant praises 1960s civil rights protesters for their willingness to die for a cause. He contrasts them with present-day gun owners, who selfishly indulge “the urge to protect [their] own life and family and property and to heck with everyone else.”

I wonder what Trahant believes “everyone else” loses when a person acts to protect their family or property. Other than the criminal, I can’t think of anyone who suffers when a crime is prevented.

Advertisement



The morality of self-defense probably isn’t a hot topic in the cities still smoldering from riots, and the potential need for self-defense is obvious where city governments refused to protect their own citizens. No one should be surprised that people are arming themselves in this environment. Their logic is impeccable.

Michael Smith

Georgetown, Ky.