7 ms·

It is, I pay for social security, must not fear for my life, you pay for private security, fearing for your life caged in a gated community. On paper you are mo

It is, I pay for social security, must not fear for my life, you pay for private security, fearing for your life caged in a gated community. On paper you are more wealthy but in the real world you are poorer in every aspect of life that matters.

willcipriano 3y ago
Americans are allowed to own the tools they need to defend themselves so they don't need to hire anyone.
- hnbad 3y ago
  Arguably the fact that you think owning a gun makes a practical difference in your own safety although a gun can not defend you against health issues or financial hardship (e.g. losing your job, interest/rent hikes) is a point against you.
  - AnimalMuppet 3y ago
    Health wasn't the (immediate) topic. Financial ruin wasn't the topic. So you're criticizing them for not replying to a point that wasn't the point under discussion, which seems rather unfair.
    - hnbad 3y ago
      The topic was quality of life and they expanded this to "security" which includes the ability to maintain that quality of life to a reasonable degree. There are ways to lose your quality of life against which guns are useful. There are many more ways against which guns are not useful. More of the latter apply in the US than e.g. Germany (which has very strict gun laws). Does this mean gun laws in Germany are better? Personally I don't think so. But it does mean the preference for guns over thse other benefits has more to do with ideology than realistic risk assessment. If you want to complain about derailment, arguably OP derailed the conversation already by bringing gun control into a quality of life discussion and I merely recontextualized that. Especially because they were arguing for a practical necessity of gun ownership rather than merely for gun ownership simply being something they see as a quality of life improvement (like having an 8K TV or the newest generation of gaming consoles).
      - AnimalMuppet 3y ago
        I said the immediate topic. The immediate topic was physical safety. Also, that topic was raised by 3seashells. willcipriano was replying to that point. Then you said: > Arguably the fact that you think owning a gun makes a practical difference in your own safety although a gun can not defend you against health issues or financial hardship (e.g. losing your job, interest/rent hikes) is a point against you. You're using against willcipriano that he was addressing a narrower context. But the narrower context was defined by 3seashells. So your criticism is unfair. (Or, perhaps, mis-aimed.)
  - Der_Einzige 3y ago
    Having a gun instantly increases your earning potential and does protect against financial hardship. Armed security guards are actually paid quite a bit.
- ben_w 3y ago
  I'm glad I don't live somewhere so unsafe that I feel the need to buy arms or armour.
  - willcipriano 3y ago
    I don't feel unsafe at all because I have the means to ensure the safety of my family and myself. For your sake let's hope this historically aberrant period of political stability holds forever.
    - ben_w 3y ago
      > I don't feel unsafe at all because I have the means to ensure the safety of my family and myself. You don't have any such means, even if you own an actual M1 Abrams tank and suitable ammunition: you aren't awake 24/7; you aren't hovering around your family 24/7; and if a criminal planning to attack you already has a gun pointed at you, your reactions aren't going to be fast enough to take them down before you yourself are shot. The way to be safe is to be in a society which minimises the degree to which criminals have access to guns, and where criminals know that killing someone is going to result in other people hunting them. > For your sake let's hope this historically aberrant period of political stability holds forever. I'm also pessimistic about it lasting, but I will consider it a sad day when I need to defend myself against bandits rather than letting the state do it for me. Think about it this way: bandits and cops are doing it professionally, most of us (I don't know if you're a vet) are just amateurs.
      - willcipriano 3y ago
        > own an actual M1 Abrams tank Tell that to the Taliban or the Vietcong. > consider it a sad day when I need to defend myself against bandits Personally I'd feel shame if other men died in my defence.
        ben_w 3y ago
        > Tell that to the Taliban or the Vietcong. That's my line. Those two kicked the USA's backside despite the superior firepower that the USA brought. Took a while, and they lost a lot of their own in the process, but they won. > Personally I'd feel shame if other men died in my defence. Why do you think that's a necessary, or even likely, outcome? First: well trained forces are much less likely to die in any given encounter than random people in the same encounter. This is also part of why I asked if you're a vet: without that training, you're not really defending you and yours even a tenth as much as you think you are. (And even with: there's a reason the unit size isn't single soldiers). Second: if you have a society worthy of the name, you can coordinate against bandits, making it harder for them to threaten the lives of anyone including those doing the groundwork of taking down criminal gangs. By way of comparison, the UK is sufficiently safe that even cops are not routinely armed — because they don't need to be.
- Scarblac 3y ago
  As a result lots of people around you do own them, which increases the chance you'll see one used some day. Which is an example of having low quality of life.
dkqmduems 3y ago
You are probably picking and choosing how to estimate expected value.
AnimalMuppet 3y ago
I'm American. I don't live in a gated community, I don't pay for private security, and I don't fear for my life. So maybe your basing your position on stereotypes rather than reality?
tapland 3y ago
What does it cost to live within a 10 minute walking distance of your job in the city center and with grocery stores, doctor's offices, the proper hostpital and the university either between or nor more than another 5-10 minutes away? A decent EU quality of living feels unattainable in the larger US cities and is available in the EU for most of the population.

willcipriano 3y ago

Americans are allowed to own the tools they need to defend themselves so they don't need to hire anyone.

hnbad 3y ago
Arguably the fact that you think owning a gun makes a practical difference in your own safety although a gun can not defend you against health issues or financial hardship (e.g. losing your job, interest/rent hikes) is a point against you.
- AnimalMuppet 3y ago
  Health wasn't the (immediate) topic. Financial ruin wasn't the topic. So you're criticizing them for not replying to a point that wasn't the point under discussion, which seems rather unfair.
  - hnbad 3y ago
    The topic was quality of life and they expanded this to "security" which includes the ability to maintain that quality of life to a reasonable degree. There are ways to lose your quality of life against which guns are useful. There are many more ways against which guns are not useful. More of the latter apply in the US than e.g. Germany (which has very strict gun laws). Does this mean gun laws in Germany are better? Personally I don't think so. But it does mean the preference for guns over thse other benefits has more to do with ideology than realistic risk assessment. If you want to complain about derailment, arguably OP derailed the conversation already by bringing gun control into a quality of life discussion and I merely recontextualized that. Especially because they were arguing for a practical necessity of gun ownership rather than merely for gun ownership simply being something they see as a quality of life improvement (like having an 8K TV or the newest generation of gaming consoles).
    - AnimalMuppet 3y ago
      I said the immediate topic. The immediate topic was physical safety. Also, that topic was raised by 3seashells. willcipriano was replying to that point. Then you said: > Arguably the fact that you think owning a gun makes a practical difference in your own safety although a gun can not defend you against health issues or financial hardship (e.g. losing your job, interest/rent hikes) is a point against you. You're using against willcipriano that he was addressing a narrower context. But the narrower context was defined by 3seashells. So your criticism is unfair. (Or, perhaps, mis-aimed.)
- Der_Einzige 3y ago
  Having a gun instantly increases your earning potential and does protect against financial hardship. Armed security guards are actually paid quite a bit.
ben_w 3y ago
I'm glad I don't live somewhere so unsafe that I feel the need to buy arms or armour.
- willcipriano 3y ago
  I don't feel unsafe at all because I have the means to ensure the safety of my family and myself. For your sake let's hope this historically aberrant period of political stability holds forever.
  - ben_w 3y ago
    > I don't feel unsafe at all because I have the means to ensure the safety of my family and myself. You don't have any such means, even if you own an actual M1 Abrams tank and suitable ammunition: you aren't awake 24/7; you aren't hovering around your family 24/7; and if a criminal planning to attack you already has a gun pointed at you, your reactions aren't going to be fast enough to take them down before you yourself are shot. The way to be safe is to be in a society which minimises the degree to which criminals have access to guns, and where criminals know that killing someone is going to result in other people hunting them. > For your sake let's hope this historically aberrant period of political stability holds forever. I'm also pessimistic about it lasting, but I will consider it a sad day when I need to defend myself against bandits rather than letting the state do it for me. Think about it this way: bandits and cops are doing it professionally, most of us (I don't know if you're a vet) are just amateurs.
    - willcipriano 3y ago
      > own an actual M1 Abrams tank Tell that to the Taliban or the Vietcong. > consider it a sad day when I need to defend myself against bandits Personally I'd feel shame if other men died in my defence.
      - ben_w 3y ago
        > Tell that to the Taliban or the Vietcong. That's my line. Those two kicked the USA's backside despite the superior firepower that the USA brought. Took a while, and they lost a lot of their own in the process, but they won. > Personally I'd feel shame if other men died in my defence. Why do you think that's a necessary, or even likely, outcome? First: well trained forces are much less likely to die in any given encounter than random people in the same encounter. This is also part of why I asked if you're a vet: without that training, you're not really defending you and yours even a tenth as much as you think you are. (And even with: there's a reason the unit size isn't single soldiers). Second: if you have a society worthy of the name, you can coordinate against bandits, making it harder for them to threaten the lives of anyone including those doing the groundwork of taking down criminal gangs. By way of comparison, the UK is sufficiently safe that even cops are not routinely armed — because they don't need to be.
Scarblac 3y ago
As a result lots of people around you do own them, which increases the chance you'll see one used some day. Which is an example of having low quality of life.

dkqmduems 3y ago

You are probably picking and choosing how to estimate expected value.

AnimalMuppet 3y ago

I'm American. I don't live in a gated community, I don't pay for private security, and I don't fear for my life. So maybe your basing your position on stereotypes rather than reality?

tapland 3y ago

What does it cost to live within a 10 minute walking distance of your job in the city center and with grocery stores, doctor's offices, the proper hostpital and the university either between or nor more than another 5-10 minutes away? A decent EU quality of living feels unattainable in the larger US cities and is available in the EU for most of the population.