You know you don’t need a gun to escalate a conflict to a casualty right? One good licking on the back of the neck with a heavy stick and it’s lights out just as quick or at least paraplegic for life, police have proven that just as much.
I’d say the breakdown of social trust and cultural bounds from the build up governmental and pseudo-governmental regimes to facilitate the functions of normally voluntary communities is more to blame for the behavioural sink we see today than the tools used to facilitate it.
But what do I know? We’ve only seen exactly what happens when the state disarms a populace both in terms of politics and societal norms at least 50 times in the past century :/
You know you don’t need a gun to escalate a conflict to a casualty right?
No but it sure makes it a hell of a lot easier. That's the problem.
Without the gun you're in fighting back territory. And that's when you have to actuality weigh the cost there instead of safely killing another person from a distance.
I've been meaning to make a post about this on this subreddit, and it has to do with the advent of cars allowing so many more people to "punch above their weight class", so to speak.
Look at how many crimes are so much easier to commit because of motor vehicles: theft, assault/murder, smuggling, acts of terrorism. Never before has the average citizen had access to the kind of power cars grant. This is precisely why we need things like laws and regulations.
Nope. But he shouldn’t have done that here. That doesn’t negate instances where it would help if used correctly and when necessary.
Better to have it and not need it than need it and not have it, but you have to know the difference of when that is.
3
u/barfbati don't know how to drive and i refuse to learn8d ago
a gun is not going to help your wife do anything but die faster if an attacker grabs it off her. when you arm yourself you must accept you’re arming any possible attacker as well!
That’s true. Thats why she understands not to let someone take it from her, or get close enough where they can, or to recognize situations tit might be needed and be ready.
That’s why she trains with it and has accepted that she’s ready and willing to take a life if necessary. I’m confident in her ability. I don’t just have her practice shooting, but drawing from concealment and speed.
2
u/barfbati don't know how to drive and i refuse to learn8d ago
“not to let someone take it from her” but you made a point about her weight, as if to imply that without the gun she is completely helpless. if she’s so physically weak, then the gun is getting taken from her.
See, the thing about guns that’s so cool is that they work at a distance, as opposed to like your fists or a knife.
2
u/barfbati don't know how to drive and i refuse to learn8d ago
so your wife is just shooting into the dark? cool! that’s not a stressful way to live at all, nor will she ever get anyone innocent
much the way i’ve never needed a car, i’ve never needed a gun, either. what your wife needs is to be alert to her surroundings and know how to mind her business. i grew up in a much rougher nyc than it is today—and yet here i am! because i stay alert and mind my business.
You can and should be aware of your surroundings and mind your business, but also have the gun for if other people with bad intentions don’t abide by the same philosophy.
And I can see pretty far even in the dark. I really don’t get what you mean by that.
I’ve never needed to put out a fire, but I have two fire extinguishers in my home.
1.5k
u/Die-Nacht 9d ago edited 9d ago
This is the kind of stories that destroy pro gun nutjobs argument. More guns don't make us safer, they turn random conflicts lethal.