Reply #237: Explain how me exercising my natural, inalienable right to keep and bear arms for self-defense costs

[jody]

you or any other American $500 per year?

On the other hand, SCOTUS says government is not obligated to protect an individual unless she/he is in custody. That means self-defense is a personal problem.

It seems more plausible that each law-abiding citizen who exercises her/his inalienable right of self-defense by keeping and bearing arms is saving government thousands of dollars per year.

IMO it would cost government several thousand dollars per year per citizen and restrictions on many other inalienable rights; e.g. privacy, search; if government was obligated to protect every American. The more likely result of such an obligation is government would do nothing leaving Americans unarmed and defenseless against armed criminals. That's precisely what has happened in D.C. and that's why SCOTUS has decided to hear District of Columbia v. Heller, 07-290.

Those who tout banning arms that Americans use for self-defense apparently allowing government to defend each citizen should also allow government to take over speaking, voting, thinking and other natural, inalienable rights enumerated in the BOR as well as unenumerated natural, inalienable rights protected by the Ninth Amendment.