Folks, I have followed this thread with keen interest. Honestly, I am of the belief that I would rather be alive to fret on the fate of my sidearm used in self defense that having the eternal view of roots!
That being said, is it typically the case where a person that uses a firearm for self defense is not only stripped of the arm used in self defense, but also any and all arms owned by the person that defended themselves? If this is the case, is it also likely that the successful defender would be flagged and prevented from purchasing replacement firearms?
I noted that Second Call Defense lists in their above base policies, that they will either retrieve or replace the firearm used in a self defense shooting. Is this advertising bait? I would think in today's world, anyone that has to use lethal force in self defense would need the assurance afforded by a firearm, considering the retribution and friends that their attackers may have.
What really is the S.O.P. concerning the retention of Second Amendment rights when a person HAS to use lethal force in defense of themselves and their loved ones? It sounds like the trend is punish a person for successfully defending themselves in a justifiable shooting, if someone takes the content of this thread to heart.
The bottom line of this thread seems to suggest that justice sides with the wolves, not the sheep and the sheepdogs!