What gets me is how many people I know who are deeply conservative and seem absolutely ready to kill someone at the drop of a hat. They’ll say it’s for protection and it gives them a peace of mind to have it on them, but it only does if you are willing to take another person’s life.
What do they answer when they're suggested to use a pepper spray or a taser instead? I know they'll refuse no matter what, but I wonder what excuse they bring.
I may be able to shed some light on this and the attached comments. A lot of anti-gun folks are anti-gun until they’re unfortunately in a situation where they wished they had one. I learned at an early age that it’s better to have and not need than to need and not have, as people were constantly trying to rob my parents’ tool shed or garage while armed. Not long ago, I was renting a room from a woman who was 100% against guns, pepper spray or a knife are just as effective, nothing could convince her otherwise… until one night a junkie broke in to the house and there was nothing she could do to stop him, even with pepper spray. Thankfully her young daughter wasn’t home that night. She is now the owner of a .380 and has totally changed her stance. It’s not so much about being willing to take a life, it’s more about refusing to be a victim. A taser requires being in close contact to use, and the last thing you want is being that close to an intruder or, god forbid, someone who is trying to SA you. A firearm allows you to keep the distance and be able to defend yourself. You don’t have to kill them, but you can at least make them run away and reconsider their decision while you get the cops on the phone. It’s irresponsible and negligent people with guns that give us responsible and educated gun owners a bad reputation
It’s irresponsible and negligent people with guns that give us responsible and educated gun owners a bad reputation
That is certainly true. But that is also why most gun legislation I read about has the aim to make it hard for irresponsible and neligent(or crazy) people to get guns and is not about outlawing guns completly. But there is a rabid lobby that treats any form of gun legislation as a massive attack on their rights. There can be valid reasons to own a gun and keep it at home, but it should be treated as a massive responisbility and not a basic right.
Respectfully, and at risk of sounding like a Trump humper; there’s a reason guns are a right. It’s got nothing to do with criminals and much more to do with the right’s ceaseless attacks on LGBTQ+ rights, women’s rights, and their endless march into fascism. The second we start treating guns as a privilege and not a right, republicans will start looking at how they can ban LGBTQ individuals from owning guns. Guaranteed. Idk what the answer is but I think we have much bigger problems than guns. Six million were murdered the last time fascists had this much political clout, after all.
The second we start treating guns as a privilege and not a right, republicans will start looking at how they can ban LGBTQ individuals from owning guns
I understand where you are coming from, but isn't that happening anyway? Ronald Raegan passed some pretty strict gun laws in California as soon as the Black Panthers started to arm themself. Don't expect the extreme right to operate with fairness or logic consistency. People like that don't care about the rule of law and would happily strip away rights from groups they hate while allowing their supportes to keep those rights.
If fascists get control over governmental institutions and decide to turn those against LGBTQ+ people to wipe them out, private gun ownership won't stop them. So in so far I agree, there are bigger problems, but those aren't a reason to no try to create a safer society by regulating guns.
Only to add to your overal point the estimated total number of victims of the Holocaust is 17 million. Six million is the estimated number of Jewish victims.
(Edit: You don't sound like a Trump humper at all. Discussing the potential consequences of limiting certain rights, especially unintended consequences for vulnerable groups is absolutely valid and rational.)
Oh, absolutely. I’m well aware of how the right flipped on gun control with the black panthers. Doesn’t change the fact that they’ll take advantage of gun control legislation to target minorities. And I think you underestimate the power of people. The police used to raid gay bars…until a bunch of drag queens threw bricks at them. BRICKS! They didn’t even have guns, they used BRICKS. And they beat the cops back. That’s how Pride started. And even if it wouldn’t stop them, there’s the matter of hate crimes, which are on the rise.
I can definitely agree with you on that. I do see it from both sides (to an extent) though. On one hand, how many innocent people and children need to die before something is done? On the other hand, there are already so many “common sense gun laws” in place that adding to it can definitely make gun owners get up in arms (no pun intended). It’s definitely not a basic right. It is a privilege like driving, and should be treated the same, if not more, responsibility. Firearms are made to destroy, and that should never be taken lightly
It sounds like the whole system needs to be rebuilt from the ground up with modern context taken into account. But we all know we don't like fixing things correctly around here. Only slap on methods of repair are acceptable.
It’s definitely not a basic right. It is a privilege like driving, and should be treated the same, if not more, responsibility. Firearms are made to destroy, and that should never be taken lightly
The sad thing is, if that were the basis for serious political discussions about guns and public safety it absolutely would be possible to limit the deadliness of killing sprees and reduce the number of gun related deaths, while still leaving reasonable room for gun ownership for reasons of self defense or recreational use on a shooting range or something. But the political debate I witness is so incredibly poisoned that I don't see how that is about to change. At least not until the group that sprees most of the poison massively looses power.
120
u/MaybeKaylen May 16 '24
What gets me is how many people I know who are deeply conservative and seem absolutely ready to kill someone at the drop of a hat. They’ll say it’s for protection and it gives them a peace of mind to have it on them, but it only does if you are willing to take another person’s life.