For as long as I can remember (going back about 6 decades) one of the justifications for private gun ownership has been the concept that law enforcement is not legally required to come to your defense. Now a former sheriff's deputy in Florida has been charged with 11 crimes for not taking direct action to protect and defend students at the high school where he was assigned to work. All the news people who have addressed this in recent days seem to be unanimous in saying that arresting the former deputy is totally unprecedented. I am not interested in discussing the deputy's actions here, but the legal precedent. I doubt that the person who decided to file criminal charges thought this all the way through, but could this result in a legal precedent that ultimately reduces the legal foundation of our right to be armed? Or is this situation a one-time thing that is likely to fade away? Or somewhere in between -- more responsibility for law enforcement, but no legal impact on the private right to be armed?