In an early episode of The Simpsons, Homer used his gun to open his beer bottle and turn off lights.
My uncle has a very common name which is apparently popular with terrorists who use fake ids with common names to try and avoid getting tapped.
Substitute knife for gun, and “have a pointy end” for “spew out bullets” and that statement is equally true.
And that’s a big part of the issue here- it’s not the actual fact that they’re lethal that bothers iljitsch, it’s the fact that they’re weapons. Presumably I should be forbidden from owning a mace or bow as well.
I have both a pointed stick and fresh fruit.
I’ve never owned a car.
Cars and knives are dangerous, but they serve useful purposes so we minimize the danger and accept what remains.
Guns in general are made to kill people and animals. Assault weapons especially are optimized to be very effective at killing people, and don’t have any other reasonable use.
If getting rid of guns means that hunters will have to catch deer with their bare hands, I can live with that.
About the soldiers/police: they are trained and have very significant oversight. They also don’t drink or do drugs on the job (I hope) so the risk of substance-induced aggression or lack of judgment is negligible. Still, there are many examples of unwarranted firearm use by the police.
When you start with the notion that having a gun is a good idea, you can rationalize until it makes sense. If you don’t start from that point, there’s no reasonable way to get there.
Well, people are going to kill each other to a certain degree. There are many tools that can be used to do this. But guns are so insanely effective at this that they amplify the “people killing people” problem by orders of magnitude. That’s my problem with them.
About two billion people fly each year. If they all have to spend 15 minutes going through security that adds up to 700 lifetimes used up going through security. So just the threat of gun/bomb/knife violence “kills” 700 people each year.
People
People who kill people
Are the luckiest people in the world,
We’re children, killing other children
And yet letting our grown-up pride
Hide all the need inside…
I’m a little late to the party, but I own guns for much the same reason I have a life insurance policy: shit happens, you can’t predict it, and you better be prepared.
I have no specific need in mind; I don’t expect a burglar to break in, I don’t hunt, etc. But I want a gun because if I ever need it, I will have it. Maybe that’s a major natural disaster, a zombie apocalypse, WW III, armed uprisings… who knows? These events are very unlikely*, but a wise person takes reasonable preparation for unlikely events. It’s the same way I keep some camping gear around and some water and food. I don’t expect that I’ll be unable to go to the grocery store for two weeks, but if that comes to pass, I will be prepared.
Actually, they’re not all that unlikely. I live just north of Seattle and there’s historical record of volcanic mudslides, earthquakes and tidal waves that could effectively shut down I-5 for days or weeks. It’s not if, it’s when. My wife lived in LA during the Rodney King riots when some people protected their stores from looters only because they had a gun up on the roof. These things do happen.
To not own a gun is to live in a fantasy world where the police will always be able to protect you and nothing will ever go wrong.
Could you describe what defines an assault weapon, and show how that can be distinguished from other kinds of sporting weapons and thus have “no other reasonable use” than killing people? TIA.
Regards,
Shodan
No, I’ll let other people figure that out.
This country (the US) started with the notion that having the right to choose is a good idea.
Even if you could somehow vaporize all of the guns in the world, you would not alleviate the need for airport security. Note that not one single gun was used in the commission of the 9/11 attacks.
what intellectually lazy BS.
Yes, because determining the exact line that demarcates guns that spit out a number of shots just this side of the reasonable/unreasonable line is such an important intellectual pursuit.
And right to choose? Yes, I hear that gun owners are all pro-choice.
I’m not a gun owner, but I do support the freedom of others to choose whether or not to own guns.
So now there are three groups? In favor, against, people should be allowed to choose?
I suppose the first 25010 threads on this subject weren’t sufficient?
Why? Some of us don’t live in the fantastical world that the police are just 5 seconds away in the case of an armed, or unarmed for that matter, home invasion. Some of us realize that all institutions including the great masses are forever competing in a struggle for power and an armed citizenry is yet another hedge in a balance of power between competing power structures. Some of us realize that even Ronda Rousey doesn’t have much of a chance against a 200lb male (athletic not fat-ass) who wants to rape her.
Yes a gun is designed to kill. Some people need to be killed.
There are people who don’t own guns who still support gun ownership for others. Your statement is disparaging to those people.
We already figured it out. You have an opinion not based on understanding, and make statements not based on facts.
Welcome to the SDMB. Stop by one or more of the gun control threads in GD, if you get a chance. You might learn how we debate around here. Or not.
Regards,
Shodan
Conservatives live in constant fear and they’ll pick the illusion of safety over actual safety 100 times out of 100.