3 ms·
Hand grenades are clearly not the primary cause since they were legal for a long time before this became a problem. Its also not clear that they account for mor
by nonethewiser 3y ago
Hand grenades are clearly not the primary cause since they were legal for a long time before this became a problem. Its also not clear that they account for more recent bombings.
Whether or not you think they should be legal is completely beside that point of them being the primary cause, which you pivoted away from. Likely because its hard to support.
- marginalia_nu 3y agoA forest can be dry for a month until a single lightning bolt kicks off a forest fire. Now tell me, did the drought or the bolt cause the fire? You may remove either component, and the calamity would not have transpired.
- skinkestek 3y agoFor once I disagree with you. You have it backwards. Norway and Sweden has been - and is - flush with weapons and have been for decades. When I grew up at least two of my neighbors had complete G3s and lots of ammo stashed in their house. There were tens of thousands of these stored in homes everywhere as part of terrestrial defense forces (Heimevernet). This wasn't a drought. It was totally unproblematic. Even if sometimes people got angry and sparks flew things didn't explode. Because guns aren't explosive. Something else has happened that has made the situation dangerous.