4 ms·

Yes, with the caveat that it's a pretty widely held opinion that it is okay to "apply violence" in a few scenarios, a couple of which are to procure food via hu

by mod 5y ago

Yes, with the caveat that it's a pretty widely held opinion that it is okay to "apply violence" in a few scenarios, a couple of which are to procure food via hunting, and to defend oneself or others from entities who intend to do (egregious enough) harm. As mentioned in a sibling comment, force multipliers like firearms allow relatively equal footing for people that would otherwise just be victims in a violent encounter. I don't think everyone has to agree on what is a reasonable amount of freedom wrt firearms.

graderjs 5y ago
Agree. It's easier to just go up and and hit someone in the head with a rock or knife them. But possibly harder for an untrained person to kill someone else like that, particularly with other people around. Guns make it easier to cleanly defend yourself, rather than having to rely on rocks or knives, but also easier to murder other people. I think the self-defense and defense of the people against a tyrannical government is a worthwhile tradeoff, tho. And, apart from anything else, the 2A is the law, and even if the law is not always comprehensible to people, as long as it remains the law I believe it should be respected and protected. So there's that, too. I think there's an argument to be made, too, for guns as a tool of true political feminism, in the sense that, if there is violence against women happening, guns 'correct the imbalance' of asymmetrical physical strength, giving women ability to defend themselves. I have one extreme idea, tho. I think if a society allows guns, then every citizen of age, whether or not they own a gun, must undergo a gun training course. I don't think we should mandate everyone must own a gun...while that could work in theory, it seems too extreme, but I think everyone should be trained to understand and respect what guns can do.

4 ms·

Yes, with the caveat that it's a pretty widely held opinion that it is okay to "apply violence" in a few scenarios, a couple of which are to procure food via hu

by mod 5y ago

graderjs 5y ago
Agree. It's easier to just go up and and hit someone in the head with a rock or knife them. But possibly harder for an untrained person to kill someone else like that, particularly with other people around. Guns make it easier to cleanly defend yourself, rather than having to rely on rocks or knives, but also easier to murder other people. I think the self-defense and defense of the people against a tyrannical government is a worthwhile tradeoff, tho. And, apart from anything else, the 2A is the law, and even if the law is not always comprehensible to people, as long as it remains the law I believe it should be respected and protected. So there's that, too. I think there's an argument to be made, too, for guns as a tool of true political feminism, in the sense that, if there is violence against women happening, guns 'correct the imbalance' of asymmetrical physical strength, giving women ability to defend themselves. I have one extreme idea, tho. I think if a society allows guns, then every citizen of age, whether or not they own a gun, must undergo a gun training course. I don't think we should mandate everyone must own a gun...while that could work in theory, it seems too extreme, but I think everyone should be trained to understand and respect what guns can do.