Originally Posted by manta
Because I disagree doisent mean I have lost the discussion. Because if someone is deaf and blind they couldint possibly assess a situation probably. shoot or not to shoot they could be shooting into a crowd of school children.
My reply is to that ridiculous statement. Ok People that threaten to go on a mass shooting should be allowed firearms legally. Murders rapists I could go on.
It just seemed like you had lost the discussion because the arguments were pretty weak.
So anyway, I maintain that someone who is deaf and blind can still understand when someone is n top of them pummeling them. In that situation, it is hard to miss. Stick left hand out, feel for face or chest of BG, get pistol in right hand, attempt to shoot BG where you know the face or chest is, removing left hand before pulling trigger so you don't shoot through your own hand.
We can always come up with situations where shooting is impractical, either for blind people, deaf people, people who are deaf and blind, or for people who full control of their senses. Just because those situations exist doesn't mean someone should be denied (by the law) their 2A right to self defense. Especially when those people are "easy prey," so to speak, they especially need to be able to defend themselves.
Firearms are, after all, the great equalizer.