I’m not disagreeing lol, guns absolutely play a part

Make them shall issue permits, as in they can’t be denied as long as you’ve gone through the proper training

No, I’m saying it does and that’s the stat that matters

Yes. The text of the 2nd amendment is contested and several states passed different punctuation, which changes the meaning.

The most favorable version for individual gun ownership reads:

A well regulated Militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed.

The placement of the comma there makes the well regulated militia part an introductory clause, which explains the purpose of the second part protecting individual gun ownership.

That combined with the historical context that anyone called into miltia service was expected to provide their own gun is the justification for individual gun ownership being a protected right.

The more common text passed by congress is more ambiguous because it introduces an explanatory clause as part of the introductory clause, but you can still read it that way, which the supreme court currently has.

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

Your telling me the country with more guns has more gun deaths, wow impossible to predict.

This is statistically meaningless, you want to look at the violent crime rate overall, the murder rate overall, etc.

Like I can guarantee Minnesota has more freezing deaths than Texas. That doesn’t say anything about if freezing deaths are a major issue or not. We need a statistical analysis of total murder rate not raw numbers

Crime rates belay the reality that most crimes are not prosecuted and even fewer end in conviction. It is estimated over a million women have been threatened by firearms.

The number of abusive relationships where one partner is afraid to leave because the other partner has threatened death with a gun is enormous in the US. Guns help perpetrate a ton of suffering that has nothing to do with convicted criminals.

Guns don’t make people threaten others, they make the threats more real and frightening. Guns are part of the problem they aren’t the whole problem. Banning guns doesn’t solve this, we need a holistic approach that involves gun control but you don’t solve these issues by just banning guns. I’d argue you can adequately address these issues through things like red flag laws and individual bans.

If you grew up in an poor urban area you would know what it is like to duck for cover when you hear loud sounds. Countless millions of people live in fear everyday in the US because of gun proliferation.

I have. I’ve had to run from a shooting. I’ve had to run from a false alarm later.

Lastly the person has no answer because they believe guns are the solution to crime, fascism, and whatever other random problem they want to apply it to.

I bet they don’t. Every leftist or liberal gun owner I’ve met has supported expansive gun reforms.

Honestly, this comes across as projection. You seem to view guns as the cause of every problem you want to apply it to.

Guns don’t stop fascism, but they make it take more resources to enforce. We have anonymous unaccountable state agents grabbing people off the street and sending them to torture camps. Now is not the time to disarm the most vulnerable in our society.

Guns make suicide easier, they don’t cause depression.

Regardless of what we do with guns we need to address mental health.

There’s a couple things that are objectively true everyone needs to recognize for this discussion:

• the prevalance of guns in america contributes to increased violence

• a significant part of this is a cultural issue, other countries have incredibly high rates of gun ownership without these problems (these rates are still significantly lower than the US)

• suicide makes up the vast majority of gun deaths, we shouldn’t combine these with other gun violence because they have different root causes

This doesn’t even take into consideration all the wounding, threats, violence, rape, etc. that is perpetrated because of easy access to guns

I’m not sure we can say this is because of easy access to guns, I can find major cities in the US in deep red states with lower violent crime rates than similar european cities.

I can also find cities in deep red states with higher violent crime than similar european cities.

Does gun prevalence play a role? absolutely, but it’s a complex issue and it’s just one of many many factors.

Providing mental health service at no cost would be a great way to handle suicide, but it would still not solve the actual gun problem.

It solves about 2/3 of it. But more seriously, banning guns wouldn’t solve the gun problem either.

We have more guns than people, a significant chunk of which are completely untraceable. You can manufacture a gun at home with about ~$300 worth of equipment.

So you don’t really have an answer other than clutching your guns.

I’d bet the person you were responding to has one if you’re willing to actually listen to them.

You know what else would considerably reduce suicides? Universal mental health care

It’d be more effective too by actually addressing the root of the problem instead of just putting a bandaid on it

I doubt you could (well, with a level of effort 99.9999% of people world be willing to put in), power and the pcie connection would cause problems.

Yeah, people are overreacting, but Google taking control here is still a big issue

https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2025/08/google-will-block-sideloading-of-unverified-android-apps-starting-next-year/

I have some issues with proton but I feel like the free tier thing doesn’t really apply to them since they provide other services and use it as a loss leader to get people onto their ecosystem. Their business model is fundamentality different from other “free” vpns because their trying to build essentially an alternative to the Google suite

Their absolutely atrocious record with what they claim to be open source apps is a much bigger issue imo

If enough people pronounce it differently, then it’s a valid way to pronounce it.

It doesn’t matter if it’s a proper noun, the word is still meant to convey meaning and as long as it effectively does that for the population in general, it’s valid.

The vast majority of guns are owned by fascists, there simply aren’t a meaningful number of armed leftists (or liberals).

If you’re advocating for random leftists to start attacking random federal agents that’s a terrible idea and will do nothing but provide an excuse for the regime to ramp up oppression.

Only if they have their bat loicense

Vests cover vital organs, but there’s a lot of other places you can be shot and killed.

Bulletproof vests are also only rated for certain calibers too, mostly of what you’d think of as a bulletproof vest will only stop pistol calibers. Sure, you can get stuff that’ll stop rifle shots, but then you’re looking at wearing multiple 5-10 lb metal plates and spending quite a bit of money to get them.

No, this is genuinely correct. I guess if all you care about is getting laid it might be a detriment

Being yourself is the only way anything will ever work out long term. A relationship started by pretending to be someone else isn’t sustainable. If being yourself doesn’t let you click with anyone at all, maybe go see a therapist and work on yourself.

Yeah, they aren’t our allies either

Yeah, it’s not a coincidence, it’s people reacting to a post glorifying a leader who played a major role in us getting where we are now.