Me too. Thanks.

  • RageAgainstTheRich@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    42
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    8 months ago

    I’m not an american and guns are not legal where i live. And i’m sorry but most people in the world are way to daft and angry and should NOT be allowed to be anywhere near a gun.

    And no, just because someone with a gun would want to hurt me but then i would have a gun too, is not a valid response. I’m not gonna survive a shootout. I’m not john wick.

    • MilitantAtheist@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      I’m not sure you’re correct. If you’re from a European country, chances are you have very good gun laws, and a lot of people in your country own guns. The difference is, you also a have working healthcare system that helps people with psychological problems.

      I live in Sweden. Most people would assume there are no guns here, but I can tell you that’s wrong.

      I train with them a lot, so if and when I need to, I can safely use them.

    • uienia@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      8 months ago

      I am a bit curious where you live. Most places with decent gun control doesn’t outright ban guns, you just have to earn the privilege to own one, and you can’t treat them like toys.

    • KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      cake
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      8 months ago

      idk it’s an interesting conversation to have, but it’s also like saying that owning swords should be illegal or at the very least highly regulated because they can be dangerous.

      I don’t have a fundamental problem with people owning guns, or dangerous things, i have a fundamental problem with people who have a violent history getting access to guns however.

      • Womdat10@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        8 months ago

        A sword is nowhere near as dangerous as a gun, Evan a pistol. A pistol can kill from many feet away, a sword you need to be close. Just because something is dangerous doesn’t mean it should be banned, but when you get to a certain level of danger, such as guns, where you could kill 10 people in a second, then they need to be banned. Even pistols are way to dangerous. Also, swords are highly regulated in some states.

        • KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          cake
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          8 months ago

          yeah, that’s not my point though, do you think swords were designed to sit on a wall and look pretty? They were an instrument of war.

          My point is pretty explicit. Also, melee weapons, in particular ranged melee weapons can be incredibly dangerous. You need to be close sure, but you can be behind someone, or they could simply not be paying attention, or you could be concealing a knife as you walk past someone for instance. Technically you can do it with a gun also, but a knife is vastly easier to control.

          Likely not as dangerous, but idk how good those stats would be to begin with, a well placed knife wound can fuck someone up proper. Even a center of mass shot with a gun can be trivial to survive.

          Also i’m pretty sure 10 a second is hyperbolic, 1 per second i suppose.

          Even pistols are way to dangerous. Also, swords are highly regulated in some states.

          im pretty sure most states highly regulate guns as well, there are a few that have pretty lax carry laws. But it’s questionable how much impact those have.

      • mounderfod@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        8 months ago

        Then again, an assault rifle can fire roughly ten rounds a second, and you’d have great difficulty stabbing ten people every second with a sword, there is a difference in dangerousness

        • KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          cake
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          8 months ago

          you would have incredible difficulty in landing ten rounds per second, into ten different people, per second. Especially from distance.

    • GiveOver@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      8 months ago

      I would absolutely love to have a gun. But it’s not worth everyone else having one too

    • daltotron@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      8 months ago

      I’m not an american and guns are not legal where i live.

      What about your police? What about your military? Do they fight with swords and bows and stuff? Actually that sounds pretty cool where do you live I wanna move

    • mojo_raisin@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      8 months ago

      and should NOT be allowed to be anywhere near a gun.

      The only problem with that concept is that it assumes there’s a class of people that know better and are entitled to rule us, but in actuality, political office attracts the worst of us. Why should the worst subset of humans control whether the everyone else is allowed self-defense?

      • RGB3x3@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        8 months ago

        People overwhelmingly agree that (broadly speaking about the US here) the government isn’t working for us, hasn’t been for a long time, and is infringing on our rights constantly.

        So where are all those gun people with their guns given all this government tyranny going on? What are they doing?

        And besides, if any gun owner thinks that they wouldn’t be absolutely steamrolled by the military, they’re lying to themselves.

        • KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          cake
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          8 months ago

          So where are all those gun people with their guns given all this government tyranny going on? What are they doing?

          pissing and shitting themselves over the concept of liberals and queer people owning guns because it makes them quake in their boots.

          (not all of them to be fair, a lot of them are pretty chill, and i respect them for that, but there is a CONCERNING amount of these people regardless.)

        • mojo_raisin@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          8 months ago

          It’s not just defense against government tyranny. I’m a trans person, I’d like to not feel helpless when attacked and the cops are on the attacker’s side. If I’m gonna die or end up incarcerated, I’m gonna do the community a good one and remove a threat on my way out.

          So where are all those gun people with their guns given all this government tyranny going on? What are they doing?

          Most people on both sides of the gun debate are the victims of propaganda ensuring most guns are in the hands of those controlling the propaganda.

          And besides, if any gun owner thinks that they wouldn’t be absolutely steamrolled by the military, they’re lying to themselves.

          Full out war against the state isn’t the only way guns can be useful for self-defense against tyranny. I don’t want my rights taken away because your imagine is small. I agree, a few people w/ AKs are no match against the military.

          • RGB3x3@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            8 months ago

            If I’m gonna die or end up incarcerated, I’m gonna do the community a good one and remove a threat on my way out.

            I get that you’re in a social group that is more at risk of attack, and I really wish it wasn’t that way. However, the kind of mindset you’re espousing here is the same justification people use to shoot minorities, or shoot children for walking into their lawns, or to shoot people turning around in their driveways. Too often, people are jumpy, racist, and not mentally equipped to handle guns. There are other things that can be used to defend yourself.

            Full out war against the state isn’t the only way guns can be useful for self-defense against tyranny.

            Please tell me what other way there is. When fighting the government, there’s no middle ground between a small group attacking targets and all-out war. And all-out war is not the way anyone wants things to go.

            • Crashumbc@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              8 months ago

              There isn’t another way, like almost ALL gun owners they are deluding themselves… Guns aren’t even good for self defense, for the average person. They are like 5 times more likely to kill themselves with it, or accidentally shoot/kill an innocent…

            • KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              cake
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              8 months ago

              I get that you’re in a social group that is more at risk of attack, and I really wish it wasn’t that way. However, the kind of mindset you’re espousing here is the same justification people use to shoot minorities, or shoot children for walking into their lawns, or to shoot people turning around in their driveways. Too often, people are jumpy, racist, and not mentally equipped to handle guns. There are other things that can be used to defend yourself.

              ok, but there’s a difference between your rights being actively infringed upon, and being an entitled piece of shit. This is why things like prison exist. And laws.

              That guy in florida that mag dumped on the middle of the fucking highway? Definitely shouldn’t own a gun, but he also got no punishment for it That shit should be illegal. There are a lot of states where stand your ground laws aren’t a thing, my state for instance has pretty specific and strict laws around when you can and cannot shoot people in your own home.

      • Crashumbc@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        8 months ago

        The real problem, is people being stupid enough to believe owning guns is going to protect them from a fascist government. (Hint they won’t)

        The only hope is voting against fascists NOW. Once they get control, that gun in your closet ain’t going to save you.

        • CancerMancer@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          8 months ago

          And yet the only BLM protests during the summer that didn’t get blasted with beanbags and pepperballs were the ones where armed protesters stood in front of police. It’s almost like fascists do not relish the thought of taking on armed citizenry.

        • daltotron@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          8 months ago

          The real problem, is people being stupid enough to believe owning guns is going to protect them from a fascist government. (Hint they won’t)

          The only hope is voting against fascists NOW. Once they get control, that gun in your closet ain’t going to save you.

          I have a kind of problem with rhetoric like this, because it implies that shooting and killing fascists is broadly an ineffective tactic, which I do not believe to be the case

          • PugJesus@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            8 months ago

            Shooting and killing fascists generally is not effective as a spontaneous demonstration of opposition.

            If you’ve ascended to the point of shooting and killing fascists, acquiring weapons is probably pretty low on your list of practical problems to solve (in order to be able to shoot and kill fascists).

            • daltotron@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              8 months ago

              Shooting and killing fascists generally is not effective as a spontaneous demonstration of opposition.

              I mean do we have a whole lot of like, examples of this happening as a case of action? I really can’t think of any, I dunno if we’d be able to ascertain it’s efficacy without that.

              • PugJesus@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                edit-2
                8 months ago

                Lots, generally in the lead-up and early years of fascist takeovers. Lone wolf assassinations, attacks by small groups, the like. The 20s had numerous anti-fascist assassinations, and the early-mid 30s had anti-Nazi assassinations.

                Effective resistance movements only develop out of the roots of organization, direction, and subversion, at which point there are numerous paths to getting the needed weapons and shooting some fascists. Prior gun ownership is a footnote in such operations at best - a liability at worst.

                • daltotron@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  4
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  8 months ago

                  The other points are well taken, I wasn’t really thinking so much along those lines. Dunno so much what lines I was thinking along honestly. Probably armed resistance leading up to a fascist government, including armed protest sort of thing, which doesn’t really involve shooting people so much as it does just kinda standing around with a gun so other people don’t get shot most of the time, I think.

          • Crashumbc@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            8 months ago

            Do you have a problem with gravity? I mean it’s going to be the same thing… Especially since most of the gun nuts that believe “they could do something” are going to be cheering the fascist government on while it goes after lbqt, immigrants, non Christians, libtards… And by the time they realize something’s wrong there ain’t going to be jack shit to do about it. (See Nazi Germany in the late 30’s when the population started realizing this shit might not be cool) History repeats…