The problem with this argument is a couple of logical fallacies, one of which being appeal to authority. No one disagrees that a law enforcement officer faces challenges that most suburban, middle class citizenry don't. One factor is that LEO's are tasked with putting themselves in 'high risk' situations, in order to do their jobs. However, with the expansion of the inner cities migrating outward into the suburbs along with it comes the crime associated with the inner cities. Police are often out manned, and under equipped to handle the increase in crime, and often warn that Police are not there to actually prevent crime from happening, but rather to investigate, and bring to justice after the incident the perpetrator of said crime. It is for that reason that we have the right, not granted by man, but inherent to protect ourselves, our families, and our property. If you think you can do that without a firearm, more power to you. But the argument that I, a legal citizen, that follow's the law, and doesn't commit crime shouldn't have a gun because you don't think I need it, is laughable, and should be ignored.