this post was submitted on 19 Dec 2024
789 points (94.2% liked)

Comic Strips

12944 readers
3365 users here now

Comic Strips is a community for those who love comic stories.

The rules are simple:

Web of links

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 1ns1p1d@lemm.ee 0 points 7 hours ago* (last edited 7 hours ago) (1 children)

I choose to protect my body by you not having guns.

Edit: I don't, but I think you can see the error in your argument now.

[–] DragonTypeWyvern@midwest.social 4 points 7 hours ago (2 children)

I'm sure this sounded convincing in your head.

[–] 1ns1p1d@lemm.ee 2 points 7 hours ago* (last edited 7 hours ago) (2 children)

It's the entire argument in a nutshell yes. A common-sense response to those desires is what separates the countries that don't have much gun crime from yours.

[–] nBodyProblem@lemmy.world 1 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

There are all kinds of discussions we can have about this, not the least of which is that “no guns” simply isn’t an option in a country with 500 million firearms and no central firearm registry.

But, really, all that stuff is beside the point. Guns are the ultimate equalizer. They equalize the weak and the strong. An 80 year old grandma can defend herself against a 25 year old man using a gun. A suppressed populace can defend themselves against a tyrannical government using guns.

Gun crime has negligible impact on most Americans; we have about half as many firearm homicides as traffic deaths annually.

Philosophically, the gun community feels having that equalizer and balance against tyranny is more important than the impacts of gun crime. Whether or not more gun control will decrease gun crime is irrelevant if a person feels that free firearm access is the more important of the two issues.

Btw, regardless of your views, if you come to the US you should shoot some guns. It’s fun and you’ll be glad you did.

[–] Doomsider@lemmy.world 4 points 6 hours ago* (last edited 3 hours ago) (2 children)

Wow, so we have too many guns so no reason to regulate has to be one of the stupidest arguments I have ever heard. It is like common sense showed up to have you shart in their face

Guns are the ultimate equalizer sounds like something a weak assed little Nazi would say. Why does every other modern civilized country not need them then? It is like you look at the worst case and say it is now the best case

I could give a shit about the feels of gun nutters. To think we have to appease homicidal radicals is fucking bonkers.

I think most people will pass on the shooting thing. There is a lot more to the USA than a bunch of gun waving lunatics.

[–] doingthestuff@lemy.lol 2 points 2 hours ago

The working class must remain armed.

[–] nBodyProblem@lemmy.world 2 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

I have traveled most of the country and 95% of Americans are normal people who just want the best for the people around them. They just have different perspectives on what that means.

You should let your hate go, my friend. I promise you’ll be happier for it.

[–] Doomsider@lemmy.world -1 points 5 hours ago* (last edited 3 hours ago)

Same and it is clear 95% are not gun nutters.

Reality is a harsh mistress and your gun rhetoric is absolute garbage.

[–] ChildeHarold@lemm.ee -1 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

Countries that "don't have much gun crime" = countries with acid attacks

[–] 1ns1p1d@lemm.ee 1 points 6 hours ago* (last edited 5 hours ago) (1 children)

This made me laugh. You sound like Philomena Cunk!

Surely, all that needs to happen is that everyone needs to carry bottles of acid. It will be completely safe in the hands of well-trained acid handlers, and accidents will only happen to people who weren't trained well enough! This means you wouldn't even need to regulate it!

[–] ChildeHarold@lemm.ee 1 points 4 hours ago

How about you just give them guns so they can shoot the acid attackers. Turns out, you don't need much training with a gun. Point shoot. Very simple. Point shoot. School shooters figure it out just fine.

[–] ChildeHarold@lemm.ee 0 points 6 hours ago

these people are such idiots. besides, the founding fathers didn't exclusively intend the second amendment to be used against petty thieves or violent criminals... they wanted it to be used to resist tyranny in all its forms. One form of tyranny is prosecutors dropping violent felons cases, judges setting low bail on repeat violent offenders, and federal governments throwing the borders open and granting special protection to violent criminals that come across the border. The government at best can punish crime, but it can never defend us. I am more than willing to accept school shootings if it means I can shoot someone that I deem a threat if necessary.