4 ms·

In practice this is something we simply do not have enough data points on (places where the population is armed). It’s easy to speculate one way or another, but

In practice this is something we simply do not have enough data points on (places where the population is armed). It’s easy to speculate one way or another, but you are only legally protected in self defense, not homicide. I’m not convinced that people being armed would increase homicide rate, could just as easily decrease it (ie Cold War effect). As the original comment poster mentioned cars are lethal weapons as well, and you don’t see many intentional hit and runs. Guns are very loud and you’re not likely to go unnoticed committing gun violence. Personally I don’t know that it is a good thing to have everybody armed, but it really is on nobody but yourself to protect yourself and your dependents. To this end, I carry (and recommend others carry) pepper spray, which is very effective in non-lethally disabling an agitator in self defense without the mental or legal burdens and pains of injuring or killing another human being. (Disclosure: I used to work in EMS, violence is everywhere in different forms. Additionally I own a shotgun for the sole purpose of hunting food, and I think the idea of “keeping it handy for self defense” is the dumbest home protection idea I’ve ever heard; you’re more likely inflict accidental self harm keeping a weapon handy in the house or carrying it than safely locked up)

simion314 5y ago
>you are only legally protected in self defense, From what I seen in US you can kill anyone if you then can argue that "I was afraid for my life" and you are white and have some money. I am not sure how exceptional this cases are though. But if this laws are what the citizens want then I am not against it, just the argument I responded felt wrong.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
dragonwriter 5y ago
> As the original comment poster mentioned cars are lethal weapons as well, and you don’t see many intentional hit and runs. All hit and runs are intentional, but the only intent required is foe the “and run” part. Because intent for the “hit” isn’t part of the crime, and its already a serious felony where injuries occur, its rarely worth the effort to try to ascertain or prove intent for the “hit” case. OTOH, its worth noting that thr same political faction behind loosening gun carry restrictions has also been actively working to loosen restrictions on intentionally hitting people with cars, in direct response to people committing criminal homicide that way. (Weirdly, its also the faction that likes to pretend to be “pro-life”.)
- jlturner 5y ago
  It may be that the “run” part is intent in the legal sense, but I meant using a “hit and run” as a a tool of intentional homicide. There are plenty of other ways to harm or kill people out there. More terrifying are those in which the victim lives but is intended to be permanently injured (such as vitriol or poisoning).

simion314 5y ago

>you are only legally protected in self defense, From what I seen in US you can kill anyone if you then can argue that "I was afraid for my life" and you are white and have some money. I am not sure how exceptional this cases are though. But if this laws are what the citizens want then I am not against it, just the argument I responded felt wrong.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

dragonwriter 5y ago

> As the original comment poster mentioned cars are lethal weapons as well, and you don’t see many intentional hit and runs. All hit and runs are intentional, but the only intent required is foe the “and run” part. Because intent for the “hit” isn’t part of the crime, and its already a serious felony where injuries occur, its rarely worth the effort to try to ascertain or prove intent for the “hit” case. OTOH, its worth noting that thr same political faction behind loosening gun carry restrictions has also been actively working to loosen restrictions on intentionally hitting people with cars, in direct response to people committing criminal homicide that way. (Weirdly, its also the faction that likes to pretend to be “pro-life”.)

jlturner 5y ago
It may be that the “run” part is intent in the legal sense, but I meant using a “hit and run” as a a tool of intentional homicide. There are plenty of other ways to harm or kill people out there. More terrifying are those in which the victim lives but is intended to be permanently injured (such as vitriol or poisoning).