It happens probably nightly. A citizen fights off a criminal in order to protect his property. But it doesn't always make the nightly news. In this case it did.
How much easier and safer would have been this takedown of a punk in New York City if the clerk had been equipped with a hand gun rather than just a vodka bottle? How much less of a burden to the taxpayer too, who will now have to incarcerate the criminal?
And just think of chilling effect it would have on criminals if shootings of miscreants during crimes like this were on the nightly news every night.
We can fight battlefield wars with very few casualties while inflicting massive casulties on the enemy, but we can't teach clerks and teachers to take down bad guys with a gun.
I don't know if liberals don't want to get it, or if they just don't realize that all this government benevolence by banning guns is eventually going to be turned on them one day.
Because while defending one's self from criminals is certainly one of the by-products of an armed citizenry, the 2nd Amendment was specifically designed to arm citizens to protect them from the government first and foremost.
"... being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."
In Other News: Can We Ask Al Qaeda for a Refund on the Bowe Bergdahl Prisoner Swap? | Michael Schaus