3 ms·

If the purpose of guns is killing, I think mine are defective. They’ve never killed anybody!

jrobn 9y ago
I find your assumption that my comment was anti-gun in anyway quite telling. I own guns myself. I do have a problem with people using them to kill people. America has a gun violence problem[1]. [1] https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/10/2/16399418/us-gun-violence-statistics-maps-charts https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/10/2/16399418/u...
InitialLastName 9y ago
You've evidently just not been using them as intended.
- drak0n1c 9y ago
  Guns are more often used as deterrents than to kill. Unfortunately, the cases of deterrence aren't newsworthy.
  - InitialLastName 9y ago
    A guy goes to the doctor with a pencil in his ear. The doctor says, "Why do you have a pencil in your ear?". The guy responds, "To keep away the alligators. See? No alligators anywhere in sight."
    - DoreenMichele 9y ago
      My dad was a two time veteran with a purple heart and guns displayed on the wall above his bed, not locked up. Our shitty sliding glass door at the back of the house, a standard feature in the houses of the neighborhood, was never broken into. Anyone that I knew well enough to know if they had had a break in could not say the same. I'm reasonably sure that word got round the neighborhood that if you valued your hide, Mr. (MyMaidenName)'s house was not a good house to break into. But, of course, I can't prove that. Maybe it was wild coincidence and we would have been magically safe without guns on the wall, never mind that no one else seemed to be.
      - InitialLastName 9y ago
        You might be right. My point is that the deterrence excuse is difficult to prove to the point of absurdity.
        DoreenMichele 9y ago
        Your absurd example doesn't really engage the point in a meaningful, substantive manner. It merely mocks the idea that deterrence is real. It frames it as something crazy people imagine. It isn't remotely a good faith argument.
yongjik 9y ago
What an insight. I think we should also cut the ridiculous budget enjoyed by NTSB, because 99.99% of all airplanes currently in service has never crashed.
- monochromatic 9y ago
  Your comment makes sense iff the purpose of airplanes IS to crash.
- jsgo 9y ago
  alright, to the response, how about "I think we should also cut the ridiculous budget enjoyed by NTSB, because 0.01% of all airplanes currently in service have crashed"? I'd actually argue that aircraft that have crashed are no longer in service and flights that were successful or grounded vs flights involving mechanical failure leading to crashes is probably at a safer percentage than 0.01% (though not certain of said percentage), but I think the general point stands.

I find your assumption that my comment was anti-gun in anyway quite telling. I own guns myself. I do have a problem with people using them to kill people. America has a gun violence problem[1]. [1] https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/10/2/16399418/us-gun-violence-statistics-maps-charts https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/10/2/16399418/u...

InitialLastName 9y ago

You've evidently just not been using them as intended.

drak0n1c 9y ago
Guns are more often used as deterrents than to kill. Unfortunately, the cases of deterrence aren't newsworthy.
- InitialLastName 9y ago
  A guy goes to the doctor with a pencil in his ear. The doctor says, "Why do you have a pencil in your ear?". The guy responds, "To keep away the alligators. See? No alligators anywhere in sight."
  - DoreenMichele 9y ago
    My dad was a two time veteran with a purple heart and guns displayed on the wall above his bed, not locked up. Our shitty sliding glass door at the back of the house, a standard feature in the houses of the neighborhood, was never broken into. Anyone that I knew well enough to know if they had had a break in could not say the same. I'm reasonably sure that word got round the neighborhood that if you valued your hide, Mr. (MyMaidenName)'s house was not a good house to break into. But, of course, I can't prove that. Maybe it was wild coincidence and we would have been magically safe without guns on the wall, never mind that no one else seemed to be.
    - InitialLastName 9y ago
      You might be right. My point is that the deterrence excuse is difficult to prove to the point of absurdity.
      - DoreenMichele 9y ago
        Your absurd example doesn't really engage the point in a meaningful, substantive manner. It merely mocks the idea that deterrence is real. It frames it as something crazy people imagine. It isn't remotely a good faith argument.

yongjik 9y ago

What an insight. I think we should also cut the ridiculous budget enjoyed by NTSB, because 99.99% of all airplanes currently in service has never crashed.

monochromatic 9y ago
Your comment makes sense iff the purpose of airplanes IS to crash.
jsgo 9y ago
alright, to the response, how about "I think we should also cut the ridiculous budget enjoyed by NTSB, because 0.01% of all airplanes currently in service have crashed"? I'd actually argue that aircraft that have crashed are no longer in service and flights that were successful or grounded vs flights involving mechanical failure leading to crashes is probably at a safer percentage than 0.01% (though not certain of said percentage), but I think the general point stands.