Itís never nice to be infringed upon in any way and is often quite an annoyance. Although, when the infringement can determine the difference between oneís life and death, you have the right to be up in arms.
As a gun owner and avid hunter, my right to keep and bear arms may reach beyond the average citizen. I have never purchased a gun for the purpose of protection, mostly because I have never felt the need for it. I think of a gun as a tool and buy them to match the situation I expect to be encountering. I have a light shotgun for ducks and upland game, a heavy shotgun for goose, another heavy shotgun for turkey, a light deer rifle, heavy deer rifle, a muzzleloader for deer, and a light and heavy rim fire for small game. The reason you suit a gun to a specific situation is that you want it to be effective and to make a clean and ethical kill. None of the game here poses a threat to human life but in super rare instances. For this reason, I have never thought in the line of self-defense. Well, that is until now.
Ask yourself, what do seatbelts, life preservers, and guns have in common? Now ask what they do not. The first question is pretty easy to answer. Most would say to protect your life. The second is not so easy to answer and you may be surprised to read itís a permit. It would be absurd to force a legal licensed driver to purchase a permit to wear a seatbelt. Not only that, but find quality references that will assure they know you, and that they believe you will not harm anyone with your car while wearing the belt. Then, you have to wait for said references to turn their paperwork in, wait as long as it takes for the paperwork to be processed, and then for a judgement ruled. Even worse, you arenít guaranteed to get your belt license and lose the money you spent for it if they choose not to issue one. Similar scenarios could be devised around licensed boat operators and floatation devices.