4 ms·

Why do most developed nations don't let citizens own guns then?

by christiansakai 6y ago

e12e 6y ago
Citation needed? I think hunting is allowed most places?
- kakwa_ 6y ago
  Well, hunting riffles, even if there are extremely common in most countries, specially in rural areas, are hardly in the same class of weapon as a bolt action/(semi-)automatic riffle or an handgun. The latter also has a different goal in mind, being generally used for self protection/deterrence. Also, carrying a gun all the time is extremely uncommon if not forbidden in most European countries if you don't have the proper permits. For example in France, IIRC, you can only get such permit if your professional activity justifies it (Police, Security Guards, etc). Even for recreational/hunting uses you need to be registered, and maybe have a permit, depending on the type of gun. And that's just for ownership, it doesn't grant you the right to carry the weapon loaded and ready to fire.
  - pluto9 6y ago
    > hunting riffles, even if there are extremely common in most countries, specially in rural areas, are hardly in the same class of weapon as a bolt action Hunting rifles are almost always bolt actions.
    - kakwa_ 6y ago
      I'm far from an expert there, but most hunting riffles I've seen, at least here in France, shot shotgun ammunition (birdshots and the like).
detaro 6y ago
Most developed nations allow gun ownership to some degree, with large variations in the regulations and limits around it. The US though are quite unique in seeing gun ownership as a basic right, not a privilege granted/earned.
dantheman 6y ago
Why do most developed nations not protect free speech? The concept of liberty is relatively new, most of the world has lived under monarchs, dictators, etc until relatively recently in the grand scheme of things. The ideas and mechanisms of freedom are still being learned.
dleslie 6y ago
Most allow private ownership, though many with final say by some registering authority. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overview_of_gun_laws_by_nation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overview_of_gun_laws_by_nation
- christiansakai 6y ago
  Looking at that list it seems in the majority of countries it is really, really hard, if not impossible to own firearms.
  - dleslie 6y ago
    > > Most allow private ownership, though many with final say by some registering authority. Often that final say is a rubber stamp. Hell, even Japan allows private ownership; with a marksmanship test and licensing restrictions.
pluto9 6y ago
I've never understood the "most developed nations _______" argument. So what? "Most" parties doing something doesn't make it the right choice. In any other discussion this would be rightfully called out as an "appeal to the majority" fallacy.
- christiansakai 6y ago
  I am at loss for words here. These kinds of argument can be made for anything. Most countries require masks and seatbelts, so what? It doesn't make it the right choice. Most countries don't allow to eat dogs, so what? It doesn't make it the right choice. Most countries don't allow to kill man, so what? It doesn't make it the right choice. I'm just giving a taste of your own medicine.
  - pluto9 6y ago
    You're making my point for me. Every single one of those is a stupid argument. There are plenty of good arguments to be made for all of those things, but "everyone else does it" is not one of them. Look, if every other country legalizes murder tomorrow, does that mean we should, too? No? Then whether everyone else is doing it is clearly irrelevant. Somebody will probably sic dang on me for saying this, but it is mind boggling to me that I have to explain this.
    - christiansakai 6y ago
      Your argument really sounds like those first year students that just attended psychology 101 or theology 101, debate 101, philosophy 101 and suddenly felt "woke" and decided to go "meta" for the discussion and mentioning "majority fallacy" instead of discussing the issue. Yeah, try that with your professors. low effort post.
      - pluto9 6y ago
        I wouldn't have the opportunity, because none of my professors ever used such poor reasoning. I'm not surprised to learn that yours do, though. Also, psychology and theology have nothing to do with any of this, and you clearly have no idea what "woke" and "meta" mean. You can call my post "low effort" but at least it isn't a word salad. I regret wasting my time talking to you. Have a good night.

Why do most developed nations don't let citizens own guns then?

e12e 6y ago

Citation needed? I think hunting is allowed most places?

kakwa_ 6y ago
Well, hunting riffles, even if there are extremely common in most countries, specially in rural areas, are hardly in the same class of weapon as a bolt action/(semi-)automatic riffle or an handgun. The latter also has a different goal in mind, being generally used for self protection/deterrence. Also, carrying a gun all the time is extremely uncommon if not forbidden in most European countries if you don't have the proper permits. For example in France, IIRC, you can only get such permit if your professional activity justifies it (Police, Security Guards, etc). Even for recreational/hunting uses you need to be registered, and maybe have a permit, depending on the type of gun. And that's just for ownership, it doesn't grant you the right to carry the weapon loaded and ready to fire.
- pluto9 6y ago
  > hunting riffles, even if there are extremely common in most countries, specially in rural areas, are hardly in the same class of weapon as a bolt action Hunting rifles are almost always bolt actions.
  - kakwa_ 6y ago
    I'm far from an expert there, but most hunting riffles I've seen, at least here in France, shot shotgun ammunition (birdshots and the like).

detaro 6y ago

Most developed nations allow gun ownership to some degree, with large variations in the regulations and limits around it. The US though are quite unique in seeing gun ownership as a basic right, not a privilege granted/earned.

dantheman 6y ago

Why do most developed nations not protect free speech? The concept of liberty is relatively new, most of the world has lived under monarchs, dictators, etc until relatively recently in the grand scheme of things. The ideas and mechanisms of freedom are still being learned.

dleslie 6y ago

Most allow private ownership, though many with final say by some registering authority. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overview_of_gun_laws_by_nation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overview_of_gun_laws_by_nation

christiansakai 6y ago
Looking at that list it seems in the majority of countries it is really, really hard, if not impossible to own firearms.
- dleslie 6y ago
  > > Most allow private ownership, though many with final say by some registering authority. Often that final say is a rubber stamp. Hell, even Japan allows private ownership; with a marksmanship test and licensing restrictions.

pluto9 6y ago

I've never understood the "most developed nations _______" argument. So what? "Most" parties doing something doesn't make it the right choice. In any other discussion this would be rightfully called out as an "appeal to the majority" fallacy.

christiansakai 6y ago
I am at loss for words here. These kinds of argument can be made for anything. Most countries require masks and seatbelts, so what? It doesn't make it the right choice. Most countries don't allow to eat dogs, so what? It doesn't make it the right choice. Most countries don't allow to kill man, so what? It doesn't make it the right choice. I'm just giving a taste of your own medicine.
- pluto9 6y ago
  You're making my point for me. Every single one of those is a stupid argument. There are plenty of good arguments to be made for all of those things, but "everyone else does it" is not one of them. Look, if every other country legalizes murder tomorrow, does that mean we should, too? No? Then whether everyone else is doing it is clearly irrelevant. Somebody will probably sic dang on me for saying this, but it is mind boggling to me that I have to explain this.
  - christiansakai 6y ago
    Your argument really sounds like those first year students that just attended psychology 101 or theology 101, debate 101, philosophy 101 and suddenly felt "woke" and decided to go "meta" for the discussion and mentioning "majority fallacy" instead of discussing the issue. Yeah, try that with your professors. low effort post.
    - pluto9 6y ago
      I wouldn't have the opportunity, because none of my professors ever used such poor reasoning. I'm not surprised to learn that yours do, though. Also, psychology and theology have nothing to do with any of this, and you clearly have no idea what "woke" and "meta" mean. You can call my post "low effort" but at least it isn't a word salad. I regret wasting my time talking to you. Have a good night.