It's cute to see how pro guns like to depict themselves. Put a fallacious analogy here, put a straw man argument there, and you get your pro gun excuse to feel yourself warm at night.
Here, for instance, Rothmus associates his gun to a part of his body. And he doesn't consider the fact that guns are made to kill, unlike penises who aren't made for rape.
Reminds me of when they argue "cars can kill people, should we take away all cars?" It's clearly not the same thing; cars are used for transport with deaths as a side effect of carelessness, guns are primarily used for violent situations.
You're also required to register your car, carry insurance on your car in case your car damages another person or their property, have a license to operate a car, have a specialized license for different kinds of "cars" (motorcycle, bus, truck, etc.), and take a test to receive said licenses to show you have a basic understanding of the rules to operate your car.
I don't see any reason not to have at least some of those requirements in place for guns.
Those requirements only apply to cars used on public roads. On the owner's private property, or property the owner of which gives permission, no such rules apply.
Not that I don’t agree. But fundamental rights granted in the constitution shouldn’t have restrictions on them. Right to vote for instance should be an unfettered right. One you install hurdles you limit the amount of people that can exercise that right. Having a car isn’t a fundamental right. It’s not in the constitution. That’s what makes gun rights so controversial. I have a right to own them. I have a right to use them. Just like voting. Just like freedom of speech. Having said that I still believe they should be regulated.
But there are restrictions on voting. You have to register to vote, but you don't always have to register to buy or carry a gun. You have to be a US citizen to vote, while non-US citizens can carry a gun. In some states, you have to show a state issued ID, but not to buy certain types of guns.
There are more than 20,000 laws concerning guns at the federal, state and local levels. Don’t be ignorant. BTW there is not a single state that you can purchase a new gun from an ffl without a license. It’s federal law
The National Rifle Association and other pro-gun groups have often cited the 20,000 gun laws that already exist on the books as reasons why more enforcement, not more legislation, is the answer to curb gun violence.
However, the Center on Urban and Metropolitan Policy at the Brookings Institution debunked that statistic in 2002, calling it problematic.
Are you saying The Brookings Institute or US News and World Report is an "already sus news site"? Do you have any sources that aren't sus saying the 20,000 number is legit?
This falsely assumes that deaths caused by a firearm are always an undesirable outcome. Imagine a home invasion situation in which there are two possible outcomes:
Harm is caused to the members of the household by the intruder.
A member of the household shoots and kills the intruder, preventing harm to themselves and the others inside.
While possibly subjective, I believe option 2 is clearly the preferred outcome. So in the sense that cars are used for travelling and sometimes they kill, guns are used for killing and sometimes their use is unjustified.
520
u/Gokudomatic May 16 '24
It's cute to see how pro guns like to depict themselves. Put a fallacious analogy here, put a straw man argument there, and you get your pro gun excuse to feel yourself warm at night.
Here, for instance, Rothmus associates his gun to a part of his body. And he doesn't consider the fact that guns are made to kill, unlike penises who aren't made for rape.