3 ms·

Three massive pieces of wrongness in this post. First, people in America can't own guns that fire '10 rounds a second' without a class 3 firearms license, whic

Three massive pieces of wrongness in this post. First, people in America can't own guns that fire '10 rounds a second' without a class 3 firearms license, which is very rare. Such guns are basically never used in mass shootings. Second, depending on who you need to defend your home from, you may want such a gun. For example, if government or government sanctioned groups are a threat. An example of this is the killings of white farmers in South Africa. Is not just about burglars, it's about gas chambers and political threats. Always has been. Finally, redefining safety as freedom is a truly absurd abuse of language which wipes out a critical distinction that has been heavily discussed for a long time. If this is what it takes for you to make your point make sense, your point doesn't make sense. Just admit it. You want more safety. You're willing to give up freedom (or rather, sacrifice the freedom of others) to get it. No need to play ridiculous semantic games to pretend there are no tradeoffs here.

tomlockwood 7y ago
Again, you are very correct. There's always tradeoffs where freedom is concerned. For example, you may be free to bring a gun into your home for defence, but the tradeoff is that you and your family are 3x freer to die from gunshot wounds as a result. Also very cool and correct of you to support the restriction of high fire rate firearms, like the assault rifles used in all of the mass shootings over the last decade. You're correct to say safety isn't freedom. However, being alive definitely contributes to freedom. Gun safety and being alive are correlated :) Remember, trigger discipline! America is definitely an outlier in terms of gun deaths. I don't know much about the situation in South Africa, but it's very interesting you'd consider the death of some white farmers in Africa as pertinent, when the vast majority of political violence in America in the last decade has been perpetrated by white men. Also interesting that you'd consider government sanctioned groups as a threat. Do you feel like if the brave men and women of the American military were ordered to take your guns, they'd do so? Why do you think so little of our troops?
- jlawson 7y ago
  "you may be free to bring a gun into your home for defence, but the tradeoff is that you and your family are 3x freer to die from gunshot wounds as a result." Do I need to say this? Correlation does not equal causation. "restriction of high fire rate firearms, like the assault rifles used in all of the mass shootings over the last decade" I never stated any such support, and that is not the definition of an assault rifle, it's the definition of an automatic weapon. "it's very interesting you'd consider the death of some white farmers in Africa as pertinent, when the vast majority of political violence in America in the last decade has been perpetrated by white men." I wasn't talking about 'gun violence', I was talking about political violence; those African killers are not necessarily using guns. You didn't understand me, clearly, but nice to immediately slip in a racism accusation there. Of course it's perpetrated by whites; they're almost 80% of the population. "Do you feel like if the brave men and women of the American military were ordered to take your guns, they'd do so?" The rest of what you're saying seems to be some kind of rhetorical trick; speak plainly if you have a point to make. I don't have any guns and I never said I was American, but I appreciate the stereotyping and assumptions. Clearly, imagining me as a truck-driving beer-swilling hillbilly, or whatever racist steretotype you prefer, makes it easier to not think about what I'm saying, because you clearly didn't engage with any of it.
  - tomlockwood 7y ago
    > Do I need to say this? Correlation does not equal causation. It has been backed up by numerous studies which control for that sort of thing. > I never stated any such support, and that is not the definition of an assault rifle, it's the definition of an automatic weapon. Awesome, reasonable gun control for all! Don't even need a handgun, really. You: > I was talking about political violence Me: > political violence in America > Of course it's perpetrated by whites; they're almost 80% of the population. White men are around 35%, so it's weird that this very vocal and pearl-clutching portion of the population commits so many murders per capita. > speak plainly if you have a point to make Do you feel like if the brave men and women of the American military were ordered to take your guns, they'd do so? > makes it easier to not think about what I'm saying What have you specifically said that you think I'm not thinking about?

tomlockwood 7y ago

Again, you are very correct. There's always tradeoffs where freedom is concerned. For example, you may be free to bring a gun into your home for defence, but the tradeoff is that you and your family are 3x freer to die from gunshot wounds as a result. Also very cool and correct of you to support the restriction of high fire rate firearms, like the assault rifles used in all of the mass shootings over the last decade. You're correct to say safety isn't freedom. However, being alive definitely contributes to freedom. Gun safety and being alive are correlated :) Remember, trigger discipline! America is definitely an outlier in terms of gun deaths. I don't know much about the situation in South Africa, but it's very interesting you'd consider the death of some white farmers in Africa as pertinent, when the vast majority of political violence in America in the last decade has been perpetrated by white men. Also interesting that you'd consider government sanctioned groups as a threat. Do you feel like if the brave men and women of the American military were ordered to take your guns, they'd do so? Why do you think so little of our troops?

jlawson 7y ago
"you may be free to bring a gun into your home for defence, but the tradeoff is that you and your family are 3x freer to die from gunshot wounds as a result." Do I need to say this? Correlation does not equal causation. "restriction of high fire rate firearms, like the assault rifles used in all of the mass shootings over the last decade" I never stated any such support, and that is not the definition of an assault rifle, it's the definition of an automatic weapon. "it's very interesting you'd consider the death of some white farmers in Africa as pertinent, when the vast majority of political violence in America in the last decade has been perpetrated by white men." I wasn't talking about 'gun violence', I was talking about political violence; those African killers are not necessarily using guns. You didn't understand me, clearly, but nice to immediately slip in a racism accusation there. Of course it's perpetrated by whites; they're almost 80% of the population. "Do you feel like if the brave men and women of the American military were ordered to take your guns, they'd do so?" The rest of what you're saying seems to be some kind of rhetorical trick; speak plainly if you have a point to make. I don't have any guns and I never said I was American, but I appreciate the stereotyping and assumptions. Clearly, imagining me as a truck-driving beer-swilling hillbilly, or whatever racist steretotype you prefer, makes it easier to not think about what I'm saying, because you clearly didn't engage with any of it.
- tomlockwood 7y ago
  > Do I need to say this? Correlation does not equal causation. It has been backed up by numerous studies which control for that sort of thing. > I never stated any such support, and that is not the definition of an assault rifle, it's the definition of an automatic weapon. Awesome, reasonable gun control for all! Don't even need a handgun, really. You: > I was talking about political violence Me: > political violence in America > Of course it's perpetrated by whites; they're almost 80% of the population. White men are around 35%, so it's weird that this very vocal and pearl-clutching portion of the population commits so many murders per capita. > speak plainly if you have a point to make Do you feel like if the brave men and women of the American military were ordered to take your guns, they'd do so? > makes it easier to not think about what I'm saying What have you specifically said that you think I'm not thinking about?