|
Keldoclock posted:Fortunately there are many ways to kill people, for example, the worst school mass murder was done without firearms. You could also steal a tank, fly an airplane into a skyscraper, build a car bomb, gas Tokyo's subway system with homemade sarin gas, mail anthrax in envelopes, etc etc. Basically you've got options, is what I'm saying. You could even innovate and steal or build a nuclear weapon, use a repeating crossbow, use a normal bow, turn on the school's sprinkler system and then electrify the floors, falsify coroner's records to "kill" millions and cause incalculable havoc, set a forest on fire, plug up a city's sewer system, poison wells etc.
|
#
¿
Dec 4, 2015 18:25
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 16, 2024 04:16 |
|
|
The first amendment and the second amendment aren't comparable. Freedom of the press and freedom of speech are paramount to a free society; freedom of guns is paramount to people who really, really like guns. Like, in a weird way.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 5, 2015 05:28
|
|
|
thrakkorzog posted:The First and second amendments kind of compliment each other at this point. You don't need to collect every gun in the U.S. to reduce gun violence. You just have to collect a lot of them. And you don't have to do it all at once; presumably, the U.S. government is going to be around for awhile; it can afford to play the long game. And there are fucktons of countries out there with free speech, and free press, and freedom of religion, and no loving guns. Hell, there are several countries out there with lots of guns, and none of those freedoms. There's no complement there, and in fact, people shooting back is something that's most likely to make it easier for someone to get the U.S. military to turn on the people; and that's really the only thing that matters when it comes to a tyrannical dictator who isn't backed by the general populace, whether or not he can get the military to fire on civilians. Because you and your 30.06 aren't going to be able to do poo poo about a B-2 dropping a bunker-buster on your backyard, or an Abrams pulling up to your door.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 5, 2015 09:13
|
|
|
thrakkorzog posted:Please name those other countries who all about free speech, and have stronger free speech protections than the U.S.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 5, 2015 09:36
|
|
|
thrakkorzog posted:So the Pope is protected by the Swiss Guard who wield MP14s. The rest of us who aren't popes can get get hosed. We don't have the Swiss Guard protecting us. I would like to have a gun to protect myself. I'd really love to know where it is you people are living where you're having to dodge War Boys and Bullet Farmers on your commute every morning.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 5, 2015 09:55
|
|
|
That Jerk Steve posted:k That Jerk Steve posted:cool me too! but these people were kinda sorta helped by having a gun so i dunno I mean, helped in shooting a whole shitload of other people because they could? But you're right, what we really need is more thirteen-year-olds spraying bullets randomly in neighborhood streets. That will certainly solve our shooting problems!
|
|
#
¿
Dec 5, 2015 10:40
|
|
|
Bug Bill Murray posted:Gun advocates apparently all live in that city from Deathwish 3 where armed thugs are breaking into their apartments every single day No, they just fantasize that they are.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 7, 2015 00:03
|
|
|
Jeza posted:I think several people have posted both practical and philosophical discussion points on why proliferating guns is a very poor way of ensuring safety, and by proxy self-defense, so I don't see why you're denying discussion is taking place. If somebody armed with a gun broke into your grandma's house, at 90 she'd probably be nowhere near able to get her gun to defend herself anyway. And if she did grab a gun, it's more likely to cause any armed person to kill her in their own "self-defence". And I'm sure there's a fair slice of demented, racist, half-blind old people out there just waiting to execute some black kid on their lawn. Because obviously, you can have your driving license taken away for being incompetent, but you won't take away granny's .45 Magnum, no sir. Oh, c'mon, Jeza, that's just crazy.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 8, 2015 17:36
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 16, 2024 04:16 |
|
|
Shoren posted:Yeah, no poo poo, having a weapon around makes injury by that weapon more likely, thanks for that brilliant insight. Removing the tool isn't the solution. Instead of mass shootings you'd hear of mass bombings instead. The only way to prevent these tragedies from happening is addressing the mental state of these individuals. Anyone in a bad enough mental state that feels they have to harm other people at random will find a way to do it even if guns didn't exist anymore.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 8, 2015 20:22
|
|