4 ms·

Red herring. It's an explicit right to own firearms in the US. No one has a right to smoke next to a child explicitly listed in a founding document. This is wh

Red herring. It's an explicit right to own firearms in the US. No one has a right to smoke next to a child explicitly listed in a founding document. This is why any gun related restriction gets stiff resistance. Contrast this with smoking - generally seen as a social blight. They're not comparable issues at all.

gymbeaux 4y ago
Both speak to the ignorance and "closed-mindedness" Americans are known for, however I see your point. That said, it's worth noting that those who fight for gun rights "because it's in the constitution" are themselves engaging in logical fallacy (appeal to tradition, I believe), and ignoring relevant facts such as the ever-decreasing relevance of firearms in everyday life, and the reduced ability of mere firearms to overthrow a tyrannical government.
- tb_technical 4y ago
  There aren't that many people who fight for gun rights "because it's in the Constitution". The vast majority of guns rights advocates own and enjoy using their guns. Their argument is "don't take my rights away". The "It's in the constitution" line is a talking point. There's more to this issue than our news organizations would let us believe. Firearms have an important role for people who live in remote places - security and food being the most important. Aside from these reasons, there are many ethical reasons to participate in hunting seasons. Just one example, look up chronic wasting disease in Northern Wisconsin - this prion disease among white tail deer happened because the population became too large in those areas. The ten most populous cities in the US are where the majority of gun violence occur. Perhaps it's better, then, that these places have more gun restrictions than the people who live in remote places. In a sense this is actually a cultural issue

4 ms·

Red herring. It's an explicit right to own firearms in the US. No one has a right to smoke next to a child explicitly listed in a founding document. This is wh

by tb_technical 4y ago

gymbeaux 4y ago
Both speak to the ignorance and "closed-mindedness" Americans are known for, however I see your point. That said, it's worth noting that those who fight for gun rights "because it's in the constitution" are themselves engaging in logical fallacy (appeal to tradition, I believe), and ignoring relevant facts such as the ever-decreasing relevance of firearms in everyday life, and the reduced ability of mere firearms to overthrow a tyrannical government.
- tb_technical 4y ago
  There aren't that many people who fight for gun rights "because it's in the Constitution". The vast majority of guns rights advocates own and enjoy using their guns. Their argument is "don't take my rights away". The "It's in the constitution" line is a talking point. There's more to this issue than our news organizations would let us believe. Firearms have an important role for people who live in remote places - security and food being the most important. Aside from these reasons, there are many ethical reasons to participate in hunting seasons. Just one example, look up chronic wasting disease in Northern Wisconsin - this prion disease among white tail deer happened because the population became too large in those areas. The ten most populous cities in the US are where the majority of gun violence occur. Perhaps it's better, then, that these places have more gun restrictions than the people who live in remote places. In a sense this is actually a cultural issue