3 ms·

I think you're paraphrasing wrong. Preventing the additional loss of thousands of dollars of that year's income and livelihood (on top of the calves that were l

I think you're paraphrasing wrong. Preventing the additional loss of thousands of dollars of that year's income and livelihood (on top of the calves that were lost) with a gun is more accurate. And additional loss would have been impactful.

yunohn 5y ago
Like another commenter said, this usecase would be covered under a hunting/farming license in most countries. It is absolutely not necessary to have an indiscriminate personal right to carry in cities.