4 ms·

God created men, and Sam Colt made them equal. Let’s say you are a fifty year old woman. Just try defending yourself without a gun.

arghandugh 4y ago
Let’s say your child is shot to death at school. Why didn’t you arm them? Why didn’t your five year old have a handgun? Why didn’t your child know how to shoot to kill? Guns are the great equalizer, you know.
- wrycoder 4y ago
  I know you're just jerking me around, but to answer your question: An infant isn't capable of handling any weapon. At around the age of twelve, children, if accustomed to guns, are capable of defending themselves, and have done so, both in the pioneer days and currently. But, we don't allow children to be armed in school, because not all children are emotionally mature. That's why we set age limits on legal firearm ownership. We depend on the school staff and facilities to keep them safe and we expect that children will be civilized by their families and their schooling to respect authority. Sadly, that is not always the case, especially in the last few decades. Using a gun in self defense is a last resort. Lawful gun owners are very reluctant to do so, because they understand the responsibility and ramifications of doing that.
  - arghandugh 4y ago
    I’m not jerking you around, I’m telling you point-blank that your solution to this problem is the actual problem itself. You have created a utter fucking nightmare world, and now you want to fix it with more nightmares. Fuck you. Fuck your guns. Fuck your lawful gun ownership culture. Fuck you.
  - happymellon 4y ago
    > Using a gun in self defense is a last resort. Lawful gun owners are very reluctant to do so, because they understand the responsibility and ramifications of doing that. Found the person who not only didn't read the article, but is essentially summed up by it.
    - wrycoder 4y ago
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_violence_in_the_United_States_by_state https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_violence_in_the_United_Sta... VT and NH, with triple the gun ownership of CA, have one half of the CA gun murder rate. NH and VT are constitutional carry states, with gun laws consistent with the US Constitution. CA is heavily regulated. How do you account for this?
      - happymellon 4y ago
        So you read the article?
        wrycoder 4y ago
        Yes. It's a jumble, but it implies California is doing great. Actually, it's not. Besides, it appears that the gun murder rate is independent of gun ownership: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_violence_in_the_United_States_by_state#/media/File:Gun_Ownership_Related_to_Gun_Violence_by_State_(United_States).svg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_violence_in_the_United_Sta...
        happymellon 4y ago
        It doesn't say that California is doing great. It says that of all the gun laws that California has in place, only 3 have any research behind them to show that is is effective. The other laws may or may not help but the evidence is flimsy. The point of the entire article is that people are just using simple graphs like the one you linked to without actually doing any studying and then making laws based upon some perceived correlation. California is strict with its rules but it doesn't say that it's a good thing.
        wrycoder 4y ago
        You are correct, "great" is probably not the correct word - I think the article claims that California is doing the "right" thing. And, of course, the people who wrote the article know in their hearts what the right thing is, regardless of evidence. The plot I posted shows that there isn't any correlation between gun ownership rates and the gun murder rates state by state. I haven't looked at the states behind the few outliers, but I suspect that people who do won't like what they find. It gets even murkier when you include gun suicides, which are half the deaths, in the polemics. People will always find a way, and some states can be more depressing, e.g. winter in New Hampshire. Edit: That 18 / 100,000 outlier seems to be bogus, I don't see it in the data table.
happymellon 4y ago
Ah, and this is why they don't have mass shootings in the USA, only other countries because Americans are all well armed! Oh wait...
- wrycoder 4y ago
  You do know that the “mass shootings” are almost always done in locations where citizens with legal pistols are not allowed to carry them, i.e. gun-free zones? And when there are armed citizens present, the shooters are usually quickly stopped?

arghandugh 4y ago

Let’s say your child is shot to death at school. Why didn’t you arm them? Why didn’t your five year old have a handgun? Why didn’t your child know how to shoot to kill? Guns are the great equalizer, you know.

wrycoder 4y ago
I know you're just jerking me around, but to answer your question: An infant isn't capable of handling any weapon. At around the age of twelve, children, if accustomed to guns, are capable of defending themselves, and have done so, both in the pioneer days and currently. But, we don't allow children to be armed in school, because not all children are emotionally mature. That's why we set age limits on legal firearm ownership. We depend on the school staff and facilities to keep them safe and we expect that children will be civilized by their families and their schooling to respect authority. Sadly, that is not always the case, especially in the last few decades. Using a gun in self defense is a last resort. Lawful gun owners are very reluctant to do so, because they understand the responsibility and ramifications of doing that.
- arghandugh 4y ago
  I’m not jerking you around, I’m telling you point-blank that your solution to this problem is the actual problem itself. You have created a utter fucking nightmare world, and now you want to fix it with more nightmares. Fuck you. Fuck your guns. Fuck your lawful gun ownership culture. Fuck you.
- happymellon 4y ago
  > Using a gun in self defense is a last resort. Lawful gun owners are very reluctant to do so, because they understand the responsibility and ramifications of doing that. Found the person who not only didn't read the article, but is essentially summed up by it.
  - wrycoder 4y ago
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_violence_in_the_United_States_by_state https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_violence_in_the_United_Sta... VT and NH, with triple the gun ownership of CA, have one half of the CA gun murder rate. NH and VT are constitutional carry states, with gun laws consistent with the US Constitution. CA is heavily regulated. How do you account for this?
    - happymellon 4y ago
      So you read the article?
      - wrycoder 4y ago
        Yes. It's a jumble, but it implies California is doing great. Actually, it's not. Besides, it appears that the gun murder rate is independent of gun ownership: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_violence_in_the_United_States_by_state#/media/File:Gun_Ownership_Related_to_Gun_Violence_by_State_(United_States).svg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_violence_in_the_United_Sta...
        happymellon 4y ago
        It doesn't say that California is doing great. It says that of all the gun laws that California has in place, only 3 have any research behind them to show that is is effective. The other laws may or may not help but the evidence is flimsy. The point of the entire article is that people are just using simple graphs like the one you linked to without actually doing any studying and then making laws based upon some perceived correlation. California is strict with its rules but it doesn't say that it's a good thing.
        wrycoder 4y ago
        You are correct, "great" is probably not the correct word - I think the article claims that California is doing the "right" thing. And, of course, the people who wrote the article know in their hearts what the right thing is, regardless of evidence. The plot I posted shows that there isn't any correlation between gun ownership rates and the gun murder rates state by state. I haven't looked at the states behind the few outliers, but I suspect that people who do won't like what they find. It gets even murkier when you include gun suicides, which are half the deaths, in the polemics. People will always find a way, and some states can be more depressing, e.g. winter in New Hampshire. Edit: That 18 / 100,000 outlier seems to be bogus, I don't see it in the data table.

happymellon 4y ago

Ah, and this is why they don't have mass shootings in the USA, only other countries because Americans are all well armed! Oh wait...

wrycoder 4y ago
You do know that the “mass shootings” are almost always done in locations where citizens with legal pistols are not allowed to carry them, i.e. gun-free zones? And when there are armed citizens present, the shooters are usually quickly stopped?