3 ms·
You're trying to rationalize the situation in the US, not looking at it objectively. You can quickly train people to use a firearm, including long before fighti
by _hypx 5y ago
You're trying to rationalize the situation in the US, not looking at it objectively. You can quickly train people to use a firearm, including long before fighting starts. You will need to store a vast amount of military equipment anyways. Storage is highly unlikely to be an issue.
- gruez 5y ago>You can quickly train people to use a firearm, including long before fighting starts. 1. It took months to vaccinate the US population. Training them to use guns would most certainly take longer. 2. Your previous comments seem to suggest you're anti-2A. What's your position here then? Are you against gun ownership, but think that if some enemy wants to invade us, there's going to be enough advance warning that we can train and arm everyone? >Storage is highly unlikely to be an issue. And what about transportation?
- _hypx 5y agoYou need close to 100% vaccination rates for vaccines to really work. Not so much for creating a makeshift army. This is an example of framing of the issue, and in this case it is deeply misleading. Nearly everyone wants what makes us safe. The problem is that certain groups in America have transformed that into something dangerous while disguising it as a form of safety. At some point, society will move away from this kind of thinking regardless of how it is perceived today.
- Etherlord87 5y agoDude, I don't live in the US and I know little about american problems with guns, so no, your guess is a big miss. I'm not trying to rationalize anything, apparently you're the one being heavily biased here, to rush into such conclusions.