Gun laws give control of guns to the government. The government is not made up of people better than us, arguably the government is comprised of the worst of us, specifically the least empathetic, most greedy, and most power hungry.
Guns are tools, tools don’t do things on their own. Of course fewer guns means fewer people killed by guns, the same way fewer saws mean fewer boards cut by saws. But if cutting boards is a goal, new methods will be found. If accidental board sawing is a problem, don’t ban saws, be more careful.
It’s the community’s job to keep guns from dangerous people (like people who would be cops), not the state’s. Giving up rights is never the answer to any problem.
It’s the community’s job to keep guns from dangerous people (like people who would be cops), not the state’s. Giving up rights is never the answer to any problem.
Wait hold on can you go more in depth about what you mean by this? It’s sounding like if I think someone is dangerous I should go and take their guns.
It’s true tools don’t do things on their own. Cars don’t run over people on their own, baseball bats don’t bash people’s heads in on their own. But the big difference between those tools and a gun are, those tools are not DESIGNED to be lethal or used as weapons against other humans.
And I’d point out, people have survived stabbings and car accidents - most never survive being shot by a gun.
People misuse inanimate objects, and sometimes death results. People weaponize knives, guns, bats, folding chairs etc etc - they drive under the influence, they don’t buckle up, they text on their phones and thus thousands of people get killed by careless drivers every year.
And you want people like that - temperamental uncaring and who misuse NON-lethal items to kill people, to have GUNS??? Can you not see how ridiculous and asking for trouble such a scenario is going to be? It’s everyone’s job to keep guns out of human’s hands - cops being the exception. And we can only do that with good gun control laws, which are (as I’ve illustrated above) both vital and necessary to our survival as a species.
And you want people like that - temperamental uncaring and who misuse NON-lethal items to kill people, to have GUNS???
I don’t want anyone to have guns per se, I just think attempts to restrict them, especially in the U.S. just means only the real bad people will have them. I’m looking for realistic solutions to actual problems, not reactions to tragic events.
Well that’s the issue. We need to be going after everyone who owns a gun and going a thorough evaluation of their mental health and past history. We need to make it a felony offense to own a gun if you have any sort of criminal history - I agree we need to get guns out of the hands of all bad people for good.
This sounds like sarcasm based on a misunderstanding of my comment, if not you misunderstood significantly.
If a gun is a tool, why is there no right to bear tools? Because guns are actively deadly and used to kill people. In the 1700s, that would have had a different societal context, as the colonies were tumultuous and had a rocky relationship not only with Britain but with each other. But in the 2020s, they’re just used to commit murder. You rarely ever hear about the so-called “good guy with a gun” and you hear a hell of a lot about entire classrooms of slain children. Rights are a man made invention and aren’t actually real. “Giving up rights is never the answer to any problem” is a sentence you made up and could easily be debated.
If a gun is a tool, why is there no right to bear tools
I’d say two reasons – one, because there are no organized successful efforts to ban tools like saws and hammers. And the other is that saws are not a fundamental means of personal protection.
But in the 2020s, they’re just used to commit murder.
Guns are used for protection of homes, for sport, for hunting for food, and some people just thing they’re really cool.
You rarely ever hear about the so-called “good guy with a gun” and you hear a hell of a lot about entire classrooms of slain children.
You hear what is profitable to show you. You’re not hearing about a great many smaller events involving guns.
“Giving up rights is never the answer to any problem” is a sentence you made up and could easily be debated.
Just taking your argument a bit further, if you’re ok with this, do you think a dictator is OK so long as they keep you safe? Why or why not?
When the government gives up its guns, I’ll give up mine. Not before.
Why is the #1 cause of death for children in the US firearms then? Countries with stricter gun control don’t have these issues.
Guns don’t kill people, books kill people.
The pen is mightier than the sword, they say.
People kill people and you’ve a genetic predisposition towards the sexuality you grow into, it’s a nurture influences nature situation (i.e. how one is raised) that impacts what alleles become active or recessive and that impacts your sexuality (among a wide array of other things, physiological and psychological).
Just because one group of people can’t live within reality doesn’t mean you need to be as equally moronic to ‘prove a point’, especially when the point being presented as ‘equal’ is unabashedly fatuous.
You’re reading into this too much. We’re here to talk about the logical inconsistencies in conservative identity politics. You’re here to have some kind of pedantic debate.
Not everyone who says “guns don’t kill people” is a conservative. I say it, and I’m pretty far from conservative. Go far enough left, you get your guns back.
Oh, no, I’m most assuredly not here to debate.
I stated facts, not opinions.
Watch out, you’re projecting
Projecting what exactly?
Does somebody think that books make people gay?
No, it’s Adderall that makes you gay. Or am I just speaking for myself?
“everyone hot” made me bi. 🥲
I suggest we ban everyone.
Yes. Republicans are banning books left right and center that have LGBTQ content in them because they consider it “grooming” and “propaganda”.
“Beneath the rule of men entirely great, the pen is mightier than the sword.”
Republicans are really going back in time for their policies.
You lost me there. The penis what?
penis mightier than the sword
Title of my sex tape.
I hope you don’t use a sword for the same purpouse as a penis.
That sign won’t stop me because I can’t read!
Or
If those kids could read they’d be very upset.
I saw this on Facebook. The dumb typical reply was “the only people who say this are people who want to show children porn” or something else insane
No, the only people that say this are people that don’t realize that anarchists and leftists in general (tankies are not leftists) support the right of the people to be armed, and also support your right to read books that you want to, as long as you don’t fuck with other people over their choices.
“the only people who say this are people who want to show children porn”
This is what you call “projection”. Normal people don’t think about that at all.
The far-right accuses the LGBT+ community (and anyone who supports them) of being child predators because child predators are the last remaining group of people you can openly advocate violence against.
They want to say “lets kill all the gay people” but they need to maintain a shred of plausible deniability.
Being from a very rural area: guns are tools. They provide self defense against wildlife and crazy humans when you’re miles outside of law enforcement coverage, they are pest control, and they are a humane way of euthanasia when a farm animal is suffering.
And like most other tools, such as drills, post hole augers, machine lathes, tractors, cars, etc… they can maim and kill when used incorrectly or maliciously. But you cannot simply ban or remove the tool from everywhere because it is still serves a very important purpose. Can they be more controlled, education made mandatory, more stringent confiscation rules in the case of people with mental illness? Yes, and probably should. But you will never eliminate the firearm completely.
I am prepared to recieve the hate and downvotes for providing a measured, reasonable response.
And this class, is a good example of a dumb argument.
About as dumb as yours, considering you haven’t bothered to comment anything in opposition besides name calling.
Oh I learned LONG ago not to waste my time in futile discussions with people that base their entire argument on opinionated rhetoric.
Pot, kettle, black.
I consider my take reasonable, and if you can’t understand the nuance of someone who’s been raised with a significantly different life experience than your own, then that’s on you. Have a nice rest of your day.
Your anecdotal examples are irrelevant when compared against facts. But you do you kiddo. I just sincerely hope that comparing your own personal experiences agains the real world doesn’t bite you in the ass later on when you’ve grown up.
I’m going to go ahead and block you from this point forward as I don’t see someone like you no getting anything worth reading down the line.
Best of luck though. You’ll need it.
K
What I always find hilarious is that the people who claim to be very well versed in firearms safety are the ones who oppose the idea of making people get a license to use one. They’ll tell you that you shouldn’t even talk about gun laws unless you can tell a .45 from a 9 mm in the dark, but feel that anyone, no matter how drunk or crazy, should be able to buy a gun.
when you’re miles outside of law enforcement coverage,
See, this might be the problem. Now I know America is a big place, But you can drone strike a wedding anywhere on the planet, it feels like your nation should have the ability to enforce it’s laws on it’s own ground without having to rely on individuals wielding firearms. And it’s not like there is a shortage of police funding. They just don’t care about your area in particular. Other places the polices get’s to drive literal tanks/apcs.
The NZ gun laws are largely based on this idea, at least in terms of being a tool for use against animals, less so personal defense against other people.
The implication of this is that some types of gun have few/no practical use as a tool other than for personal defense/offense.
Rifles and shotguns are useful for hunting. Fully automatic & select fire weapons are not, or are at least excessive. They’re only useful if you intend to attack people.
Same goes for handguns.
Another sane approach by NZ.
The issue here is that it is perceived as a right and not a privilege.
Because of that, anything restricting that “right” at all is perceived as an infringement on the personality of the gun user.
With cars most people are on board with the concept that being caught while DUI leads to a ban on driving.
The same is not true for people handling guns while drunk or in an irresponsible way.
It’s also totally understood by people that there are areas where you don’t drive (e.g. inside a shopping mall). Again, the same is not true with guns.
And that’s the issue here.
The “right” needs to be made into a privilege that is allowed under certain circumstances (e.g. if you need it for work or live in a very remote area). This does not contradict with banning guns in cities, schools, towns or other areas where guns serve no positive purpose.
Your use case is valid, but also many gun owners aren’t in your situation.
Do you think we don’t have guns outside of USA??? I don’t think your point is very well measured if you think rural population in Canada do not have guns. Also, books are tools too.
I am prepared to recieve the hate and downvotes for providing a measured, reasonable response.
You didn’t so much provide a measured reasonable response as you compared actual labor saving tools to a machine designed specifically to kill/maim. Then you patted yourself on the back for being brave enough to make such a comparison while preemptively disregarding any discussions to the contrary.
How does getting a gun compare to getting a car?
So I guess you’re in favor of getting those “crazy humans” the help they need to stop being crazy, and to only allow guns with special permits for things like farm work, hunting and shooting ranges, right?
Because it’s a bit of a straw man argument otherwise. People using guns responsibility for their work is not the problem.
I am proud to be pro gun and pro lgbtq+ ✊Sorry if you’re being sarcastic, but why then do the workers with the guns have the least rights?
What rights do you think we don’t have in the USA? I can do whatever I want, and I do every day in the USA.
Books don’t gay people. Gay people gay people.
Did I do it right?
The only way to stop a bad gay with a book, is a good gay with a book
The second amendment clearly states that the “right of people to keep and read gay books shall not be infringed”
Books didn’t make me gay, it was those stupid sexy men with their penises.
If the target audience could read, they d be very upset
At least that’ll keep them safe from being turned gay.
I know a gay person who can read. It checks out.
Remember, the only way to stop a bad guy with a gay is a good guy with a gay
Dude talks about bringing the big guns out, unzips and an actual pistol falls out! Anyone would be shitting themselves at the balls
Hi I’m gay, where are the bad boys?
