4 ms·

I know nobody who owns a firearm and I am pretty sure close to nobody of them know somebody themselves. Same goes for being a victim of a criminal offense. Ag

by bulbar 11mo ago

I know nobody who owns a firearm and I am pretty sure close to nobody of them know somebody themselves. Same goes for being a victim of a criminal offense. Against what/who are your defending with those firearms in the US?

mothballed 11mo ago
Who would tell you they have them if you are in a country where it is illegal? For instance the fgc-9[] commonly seized in parts of Europe was invented by a German in Germany (ethnic Kurd though). No one knew who he was until he was arrested and for the most part until he was dead. His european friends would be saying the same thing as you, "don't know anyone with guns..." Lots of guns in Europe by people who aren't supposed to have them. Either because they are criminals thus don't care about gun laws, or if they are 'good' people then they should know not to pull out a gun unless their other option is to be dead -- at which point 'fuck the law' and better to be in a jail cell than dead. [] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FGC-9 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FGC-9
- bulbar 11mo ago
  At least in Germany they are legal in general, only highly regulated. Most guns are owned by relatively few people. Nobody from the common crowd here thinks about owning fire arms, virtually nobody does. Maybe that's a cultural gap hard to imagine from an US perspective. The question remains, against what and who are you even defending? Maybe it's different in Europe because it's densely populated, but people generally don't consider fire arms being a net plus to the security of themselves and that of their family. It also just doesn't seem useful to move to a state with loose fire arms laws - it's much better to move to a state/city/neighborhood with low crime rate instead.
  - mothballed 11mo ago
    It's still within living memory of some Germans of their own government systematically mass murdering them after blocking their escape.
    - bulbar 11mo ago
      I have never heard anybody claim that a higher availability of fire arms for civilians would have helped. Fire arms is the very last measure you want to rely on when a highly militarized police force is prepared to deport you and your family.
      - mothballed 11mo ago
        I've repeated it several times in this thread, but it absolutely helped those in the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising gain hours to days, and a couple women who had their lives spared because the Nazi or Nazi-allied officers decided at least a couple of jews (see woman on right here for example[]) were humans with bravery rather than just more carbon for the incinerator. Although I'll grant you, that took place in Poland, but it happened largely due to the German government. [] https://1943.pl/en/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2020/05/Kobiety-w-powstaniu-2-Stroop-edt-370x260.jpg https://1943.pl/en/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2020/05/Kobiet...
        bulbar 11mo ago
        Sounds like a desperate suicidal operation and fits perfectly to what I wrote: that fire arms are the last measure you want to rely on.
        mothballed 11mo ago
        Yes the last option, like a fire extinguisher or seat belt. It doesn't become useful until the very last moment, but you'd give the world to have only have learned how to use one when days were better, and also to not be trying to buy one at at time where everyone's house is already on fire.
        bulbar 11mo ago
        In your example, virtually everybody died, even with fire arms. So I still wonder against what / who you are really defending. Needing a seat belt is much more likely than needing a fire arms, at least in Europe. Focusing on fire arms means focusing on the wrog things. It's about a feeling of security, not actual security. To use your wording: You'd give the world to have focussed on something else instead of buying a fire arm.

by bulbar 11mo ago

mothballed 11mo ago

Who would tell you they have them if you are in a country where it is illegal? For instance the fgc-9[] commonly seized in parts of Europe was invented by a German in Germany (ethnic Kurd though). No one knew who he was until he was arrested and for the most part until he was dead. His european friends would be saying the same thing as you, "don't know anyone with guns..." Lots of guns in Europe by people who aren't supposed to have them. Either because they are criminals thus don't care about gun laws, or if they are 'good' people then they should know not to pull out a gun unless their other option is to be dead -- at which point 'fuck the law' and better to be in a jail cell than dead. [] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FGC-9 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FGC-9

bulbar 11mo ago
At least in Germany they are legal in general, only highly regulated. Most guns are owned by relatively few people. Nobody from the common crowd here thinks about owning fire arms, virtually nobody does. Maybe that's a cultural gap hard to imagine from an US perspective. The question remains, against what and who are you even defending? Maybe it's different in Europe because it's densely populated, but people generally don't consider fire arms being a net plus to the security of themselves and that of their family. It also just doesn't seem useful to move to a state with loose fire arms laws - it's much better to move to a state/city/neighborhood with low crime rate instead.
- mothballed 11mo ago
  It's still within living memory of some Germans of their own government systematically mass murdering them after blocking their escape.
  - bulbar 11mo ago
    I have never heard anybody claim that a higher availability of fire arms for civilians would have helped. Fire arms is the very last measure you want to rely on when a highly militarized police force is prepared to deport you and your family.
    - mothballed 11mo ago
      I've repeated it several times in this thread, but it absolutely helped those in the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising gain hours to days, and a couple women who had their lives spared because the Nazi or Nazi-allied officers decided at least a couple of jews (see woman on right here for example[]) were humans with bravery rather than just more carbon for the incinerator. Although I'll grant you, that took place in Poland, but it happened largely due to the German government. [] https://1943.pl/en/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2020/05/Kobiety-w-powstaniu-2-Stroop-edt-370x260.jpg https://1943.pl/en/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2020/05/Kobiet...
      - bulbar 11mo ago
        Sounds like a desperate suicidal operation and fits perfectly to what I wrote: that fire arms are the last measure you want to rely on.
        mothballed 11mo ago
        Yes the last option, like a fire extinguisher or seat belt. It doesn't become useful until the very last moment, but you'd give the world to have only have learned how to use one when days were better, and also to not be trying to buy one at at time where everyone's house is already on fire.
        bulbar 11mo ago
        In your example, virtually everybody died, even with fire arms. So I still wonder against what / who you are really defending. Needing a seat belt is much more likely than needing a fire arms, at least in Europe. Focusing on fire arms means focusing on the wrog things. It's about a feeling of security, not actual security. To use your wording: You'd give the world to have focussed on something else instead of buying a fire arm.