In a mis-guided attempt at protecting lives, this measure creates yet another series of soft targets to be considered for terrorism, both domestic and foreign.

Let's pause to define an act of terror in this context as any attempt by a non-state entity, either individual or organization to cause traumatic physical harm to innocents thereby creating fear and panic in a population.  For this definition an ideology is not required, but only the violent act itself.

Our country and the Commonwealth have many, many laws which were drafted in the hope of limiting the type of violence and assaults which paint the news on a daily basis, and yet the laws continue to be ignored by the criminal population.  For those of us who choose and are required to follow the laws, we become fodder for any attempt at our lives by those that could care less about the repurcussions of those laws on their life and individual freedom.

As a prior federal criminal investigator I can attest that I never once arrived at a crime scene like the super hero in movies.  When I arrived there was a victim or victims, and hopefully a witness somewhere to help us find the perpetrator and bring them to justice.  My issued weapons were not for the protection of the public, they were for MY protection because I was sworn to apprehend people who had already broken the law and had a known propensity to commit violent acts.  Case law precedent throughout the nation and Commonwealth's history supports the inherent right of an INDIVIDUAL to protect themselves from criminal and/or terroristic threats.

I urge any lawmaker with a security detail, Mr. Governor, to consider your inalienable right to self defense as no more or less important than the right of the citizens of your Commonwealth whom you are attempting to disarm through non-legislative policy.  Regardless of your stance on firearm use in self defense, we as a population are at a moment in history where firearms are the ONLY viable means of defense by which we can be reasonably assured.