3 ms·

> Because communal goals can't trump individual freedoms. They can and do, and in ways I'd be willing to bet you support. The entire function of government in

> Because communal goals can't trump individual freedoms. They can and do, and in ways I'd be willing to bet you support. The entire function of government in society is to restrict individual freedoms in favor of communal goals: - the freedom to harm others in body or property - the freedom to keep your entire income earned in the United States - the freedom to move across political boundaries without restriction - ... Everything a government does can be framed as "restricting individual freedoms in favor of communal goals". In the case of guns, I happen to be convinced that one of the essential functions of a state is to maintain a monopoly on the use of force [0]. > Play it little differently, imagine each successful use of gun to defend oneself or their loved ones I can tug heartstrings too! Let's imagine each successful use of a gun to hurt oneself or someone else. How about each instance where a woman was raped at gunpoint, or a child killed himself or a friend with their parents' gun, or somebody killed themselves on a whim (it frequently is, when guns are accessible). How am I not an enemy of those people if I say "It was ok for those people to have guns"? Let me clarify, I'm not really in favor of a total ban on guns, I'm just not willing to rule out restricting them in the same way we restrict the other dangerous things our society has created. [0] https://www.britannica.com/topic/state-monopoly-on-violence https://www.britannica.com/topic/state-monopoly-on-violence

AmIFirstToThink 9y ago
Does one have freedom to enslave another? Do I have freedom to get into a slavery contract (sale myself into slavery) with another person? Do I have freedom to commit crime without repercussions? Of course not. I have freedoms as long as they don't impede on freedoms of another fellow citizen in broadest sense, and fellow human being in restricted sense, in their pursuit of happiness and liberty. Freedom to protect oneself from aggressor is basic human right. Guns is an extension of that right in modern era. Of course, nukes are not OK as individual weapon of choice. Without guns, basic human strength plays a disproportionate role in ensuring individuals right to self preservation against aggressor. >Let's imagine each successful use of a gun to hurt oneself or someone else. Let's. Improper use of a tool hurt people and bystanders all the time. Guns are no different than cars, book shelves, swimming pools, knives, electricity and chemicals in this regard. >How about each instance where a woman was raped at gunpoint What's your point? Is he criminal in your mind because he has gun or because he is raping someone? Can you ensure in your gun-free world even criminals won't have guns? I don't understand this obsession to stand up for law abiding criminals. Ha raped her, but at least he wasn't at gun point. Whew! that was close. >child killed himself A gun hating friend of mine has a Shepard dog that my friend openly says is for protecting house and house members. The dog has hurt couple of kids but that's fine in his book, but a gun, oh, no, we must say no to guns. If guns have to go then all dogs above one feet height must go as well, each car must drive at 5 miles an hour and must come with padded cushions on the outside, each knife must be wooden, no metal knives. >I happen to be convinced that one of the essential functions of a state is to maintain a monopoly on the use of force [0]. Which state isn't? The right to bear arm by common citizenry is hard fought and hard won right. I am not willing to outsource it to government because it makes it feel good. You could depend on police to save you in each and every situation, your call, I won't force you to own guns. But, you saying no one else should be able to defend themselves either is attack on those who want to. You are worse than the criminals who attack their victims. For abortion, the right wing makes same arguments. They don't want to avail abortion in any situation and they want to remove that as a option from all other humans beings as well. I am for abortion and for guns. Let people, individuals, decide what they want.

AmIFirstToThink 9y ago

Does one have freedom to enslave another? Do I have freedom to get into a slavery contract (sale myself into slavery) with another person? Do I have freedom to commit crime without repercussions? Of course not. I have freedoms as long as they don't impede on freedoms of another fellow citizen in broadest sense, and fellow human being in restricted sense, in their pursuit of happiness and liberty. Freedom to protect oneself from aggressor is basic human right. Guns is an extension of that right in modern era. Of course, nukes are not OK as individual weapon of choice. Without guns, basic human strength plays a disproportionate role in ensuring individuals right to self preservation against aggressor. >Let's imagine each successful use of a gun to hurt oneself or someone else. Let's. Improper use of a tool hurt people and bystanders all the time. Guns are no different than cars, book shelves, swimming pools, knives, electricity and chemicals in this regard. >How about each instance where a woman was raped at gunpoint What's your point? Is he criminal in your mind because he has gun or because he is raping someone? Can you ensure in your gun-free world even criminals won't have guns? I don't understand this obsession to stand up for law abiding criminals. Ha raped her, but at least he wasn't at gun point. Whew! that was close. >child killed himself A gun hating friend of mine has a Shepard dog that my friend openly says is for protecting house and house members. The dog has hurt couple of kids but that's fine in his book, but a gun, oh, no, we must say no to guns. If guns have to go then all dogs above one feet height must go as well, each car must drive at 5 miles an hour and must come with padded cushions on the outside, each knife must be wooden, no metal knives. >I happen to be convinced that one of the essential functions of a state is to maintain a monopoly on the use of force [0]. Which state isn't? The right to bear arm by common citizenry is hard fought and hard won right. I am not willing to outsource it to government because it makes it feel good. You could depend on police to save you in each and every situation, your call, I won't force you to own guns. But, you saying no one else should be able to defend themselves either is attack on those who want to. You are worse than the criminals who attack their victims. For abortion, the right wing makes same arguments. They don't want to avail abortion in any situation and they want to remove that as a option from all other humans beings as well. I am for abortion and for guns. Let people, individuals, decide what they want.