3 ms·

>Downsides like mass shootings that would be difficult to accomplish without easy access to firearms. They were easy to accomplish because they targeted places

>Downsides like mass shootings that would be difficult to accomplish without easy access to firearms. They were easy to accomplish because they targeted places that they knew for sure where the people would be unarmed, our laws ensured it. An attempt against local gun club or police station is not going to succeed, is it? People who want commit crimes don't care if the guns they use were acquired legally. They can acquire a gun from black market. And just like with drugs, making it illegal ensures that there would be a thriving black market. We made those events possible by making gun-free zones. I hope we collectively would come to senses and trust our fellow human being, instead of treating everyone as psychopathic criminal. >Downsides like deaths caused by accidents with firearms. Less than 600 deaths in 2013. but 16,000 deaths related to Ibuprofen. You may say one accident is too many. I would say one person stopped by us collectively from protecting themselves against an aggressor is one too many. You are thinking about group. I care about individual. And Gun Access must be looked at through individual rights lens. > Another point is that even carrying a firearm isn't protection against an unexpected attack. I am not asking for complete guarantee of safety against attack. BTW, do you think cops can provide that? I am asking for opportunity to defend myself without being preemptively disarmed, that's all. People launch startups knowing that most will fail. They appreciate the opportunity to try. Gun Access is an opportunity to try, if you want to take it, no one is forcing it on you, just like no one is forcing everyone to launch a startup. One may feel secure in capabilities of police to keep them safe. One may feel secure in corporate job instead of a startup. But, one must have an option to start a startup if one so desires. One must have an option to defend oneself with guns, if one so desires.

Chris2048 9y ago
> They can acquire a gun from black market and if they are caught with such a gun, they can face serious consequence. A BM gun is illegal every step of the supply chain. > I am asking for opportunity to defend myself without being preemptively disarmed, that's all. If someone with a knife or cosh gets you unexpectedly from behind, they now have a gun. A failed startup won't cause other startups to fail.
- AmIFirstToThink 9y ago
  >If someone with a knife or cosh gets you unexpectedly from behind, they now have a gun. You are trying to ensure a certain outcome in a situation where you have no control. I am only trying to make sure that I don't stop a person from having an option to defend themselves using guns. I can't guarantee outcome, neither can you. I am with the victim's right to defend herself/himself using guns, if they chose to do so. You are with criminal to ensure that potential victims would be unarmed.
jaredklewis 9y ago
But acquiring guns on the black market isn't going to be an option for many types of shooters. Like the mentally challenged killer in the Sandy Brooke shooting. Here in Japan, there is of course a black market for guns. But basically the black market is so prohibitively expensive. This eliminates a huge swath of the population, mainly everyone that isn't rich. And again, I don't dispute that there are other ways to kill. Only that most of them are vastly less efficient, reducing the possibility of sprees like those we see in the US. Also 600 deaths is nothing to scoff at. Hard to know, but my intuition is that 600 deaths is higher than the number prevented by guns.
- AmIFirstToThink 9y ago
  We can't draw a line on a plot chart and say see that's why we shouldn't have guns. By that measure, given the car accident deaths, we shouldn't be driving around. Because someone was dumb, I shouldn't be allowed to defend myself with guns? that doesn't make sense.

Chris2048 9y ago

> They can acquire a gun from black market and if they are caught with such a gun, they can face serious consequence. A BM gun is illegal every step of the supply chain. > I am asking for opportunity to defend myself without being preemptively disarmed, that's all. If someone with a knife or cosh gets you unexpectedly from behind, they now have a gun. A failed startup won't cause other startups to fail.

AmIFirstToThink 9y ago
>If someone with a knife or cosh gets you unexpectedly from behind, they now have a gun. You are trying to ensure a certain outcome in a situation where you have no control. I am only trying to make sure that I don't stop a person from having an option to defend themselves using guns. I can't guarantee outcome, neither can you. I am with the victim's right to defend herself/himself using guns, if they chose to do so. You are with criminal to ensure that potential victims would be unarmed.

jaredklewis 9y ago

But acquiring guns on the black market isn't going to be an option for many types of shooters. Like the mentally challenged killer in the Sandy Brooke shooting. Here in Japan, there is of course a black market for guns. But basically the black market is so prohibitively expensive. This eliminates a huge swath of the population, mainly everyone that isn't rich. And again, I don't dispute that there are other ways to kill. Only that most of them are vastly less efficient, reducing the possibility of sprees like those we see in the US. Also 600 deaths is nothing to scoff at. Hard to know, but my intuition is that 600 deaths is higher than the number prevented by guns.

AmIFirstToThink 9y ago
We can't draw a line on a plot chart and say see that's why we shouldn't have guns. By that measure, given the car accident deaths, we shouldn't be driving around. Because someone was dumb, I shouldn't be allowed to defend myself with guns? that doesn't make sense.