4 ms·

Who said anything about "unsecured and unlocked"? I don't think you can easily secure a gun in a vehicle when the vehicle can be stolen. Also, it is not the c

Who said anything about "unsecured and unlocked"? I don't think you can easily secure a gun in a vehicle when the vehicle can be stolen. Also, it is not the case that "having a firearm unsecured and unlocked inside a vehicle is a crime" where I live.

dangus 3y ago
Since property is so easy to steal then it’s probably not good for society to have minimal restrictions on ownership of firearms.
- 0ct4via 3y ago
  You're being deliberately disingenuous again, there's a massive difference between securing something on your person, and leaving it unattended in a vehicle - especially given how commonplace vehicle thefts and break-ins are. If you're going to troll to push your anti-gun rhetoric, at least try and go for reasoned arguments rather than ridiculous hypotheticals and apparently-serious hyperbole.
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
  - dangus 3y ago
    It’s sad to think that we’re so deep into the gun lobby’s idea of normal society that you think what I am saying is “pro-gun rhetoric.” No, it’s not, my rhetoric is that of a person that wants to live in a society as the rest of the developed world understands it. Here’s my reasoned argument: our government is verifiably deeply intertwined with gun organizations and manufacturers. Without this influence we would see our nation’s wildly statistically abnormal situation as a cause for urgent action. Instead, we’ve been trained to think of that anything against our “freedom” to own guns as “anti-gun rhetoric.” https://archive.is/sNDTt https://archive.is/sNDTt
    - 0ct4via 3y ago
      Who is "we" in this? You're making things up, casing baseless assumptions, and I said "anti-gun rhetoric," not pro -- so if you're going to lie, at least don't make it something instantly disprovable. Your rhetoric is by your own admission rhetoric, and is demonstrably anti-gun, therefore "anti-gun rhetoric" is an accurate observation to make -- why are you getting triggered about that? I didn't say the NRA wasn't a steaming pile of trash. I didn't say there weren't issues with big gun manufacturers getting into bed with politicians, just as happens with corporations across the entire capitalist hellscale -- that's the nature of it. Instead, you just made baseless assumptions (which you're patently wrong about) and lashed out with your spiel. Don't assume. Quit trolling. Try harder next time.
      - dangus 3y ago
        I meant “anti-gun,” that was a typographical error. What did you think of the article I sent? I’m not triggered by anything. I’m not trolling. I’m just disappointed.
- cryptonector 3y ago
  That's like arguing that there should be no private property. Are you?

dangus 3y ago

Since property is so easy to steal then it’s probably not good for society to have minimal restrictions on ownership of firearms.

0ct4via 3y ago
You're being deliberately disingenuous again, there's a massive difference between securing something on your person, and leaving it unattended in a vehicle - especially given how commonplace vehicle thefts and break-ins are. If you're going to troll to push your anti-gun rhetoric, at least try and go for reasoned arguments rather than ridiculous hypotheticals and apparently-serious hyperbole.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- dangus 3y ago
  It’s sad to think that we’re so deep into the gun lobby’s idea of normal society that you think what I am saying is “pro-gun rhetoric.” No, it’s not, my rhetoric is that of a person that wants to live in a society as the rest of the developed world understands it. Here’s my reasoned argument: our government is verifiably deeply intertwined with gun organizations and manufacturers. Without this influence we would see our nation’s wildly statistically abnormal situation as a cause for urgent action. Instead, we’ve been trained to think of that anything against our “freedom” to own guns as “anti-gun rhetoric.” https://archive.is/sNDTt https://archive.is/sNDTt
  - 0ct4via 3y ago
    Who is "we" in this? You're making things up, casing baseless assumptions, and I said "anti-gun rhetoric," not pro -- so if you're going to lie, at least don't make it something instantly disprovable. Your rhetoric is by your own admission rhetoric, and is demonstrably anti-gun, therefore "anti-gun rhetoric" is an accurate observation to make -- why are you getting triggered about that? I didn't say the NRA wasn't a steaming pile of trash. I didn't say there weren't issues with big gun manufacturers getting into bed with politicians, just as happens with corporations across the entire capitalist hellscale -- that's the nature of it. Instead, you just made baseless assumptions (which you're patently wrong about) and lashed out with your spiel. Don't assume. Quit trolling. Try harder next time.
    - dangus 3y ago
      I meant “anti-gun,” that was a typographical error. What did you think of the article I sent? I’m not triggered by anything. I’m not trolling. I’m just disappointed.
cryptonector 3y ago
That's like arguing that there should be no private property. Are you?