The evolutionary outcome of the fight-or-flight response is a physiological reaction that occurs in response to a perceived harmful event, attack, or threat to survival. When you have been the third person witness (news viewer) of an attack that has defeated the survival of many such as a mass murder or act of terrorism did it have a significant impact on you emotionally?
If your answer to the above was (No) what do you believe is the reason that you did not feel very much in response to the news report?
(A) A flight response is to look for a solution that deprives a future attacker of having a capacity to act offensively.
(B) A fight response is to look for a solution that enables a future protector a capacity to act defensively.
(A) The rationale of those of the “offensive camp” is that the police are obliged to have weapons and citizens must be denied possession of a regulated weapon for the purpose of self-defense because the weapon could be stolen or misused for personal motives.
(B) The rationale of those of the “defensive camp” is that because locks are for honest people, and in outlawing the weapon only outlaws (not victims) have weapons because the knowledge of how to manufacture weapons cannot be eradicated.
In considering the possibilities of a solution being (A) or (B) or a combination of (A) and (B) which of the above rationale best defines your thinking?
Do you feel that self-defense is a legitimate premise for a Citizen to possess a regulated weapon in specific circumstances?
Question 6 (Comment):
In your opinion what do you consider is the solution to reducing grievous violence in Australian society?