3 ms·

Why do you want to rely on others for protection? You don't have to search very hard to find stories of peoples houses being broken into, they get assaulted, wo

Why do you want to rely on others for protection? You don't have to search very hard to find stories of peoples houses being broken into, they get assaulted, women raped, etc. I believe that I have the right to protect myself and my family. I don't need an AR-15 to do that, but I think I should be able to own a shotgun. Furthermore, not everyone lives in an area where the police actually give a shit. There are plenty of bad areas in major cities where you are basically on your own (Flint, Detroit, New Orleans, etc.).

monochromatic 14y ago
AR-15s actually make excellent home defense weapons. 30 rounds on tap, very effective ballistics. And people don't realize it, but 5.56 typically has less overpenetration issues than buckshot.
gradstudent 14y ago
> Why do you want to rely on others for protection? You don't have to search very hard to find stories of peoples houses being broken into, they get assaulted, women raped, etc. I believe that I have the right to protect myself and my family. I don't need an AR-15 to do that, but I think I should be able to own a shotgun. Don't you think there's something seriously wrong with a society that requires people to carry guns in order to feel safe? Focus on fixing that, not protecting your right to bear arms!
- lutusp 14y ago
  > Don't you think there's something seriously wrong with a society that requires people to carry guns in order to feel safe? Just for the sake of argument, where is that not true? Are you aware that a Swedish prime minister was gunned down in the street (Olof Palme)? And in Norway, a mass murderer has just been sentenced to 21 years for gunning down 77 people. I mention these cases because people tend to think of these Scandinavian countries as polar opposites of gun-crazy America. They are certainly much safer than the U.S. with respect to gun violence, but they're not safe in any absolute sense, as in your claim. The problem with your position is not that it's false -- it's very clearly true -- it's that nothing can be done about it. Life is dangerous, and as world population increases, it's becoming more dangerous. It's an existential problem, not a practical one.
  - gradstudent 14y ago
    > I mention these cases because people tend to think of these Scandinavian countries as polar opposites of gun-crazy America. They are certainly much safer than the U.S. with respect to gun violence, but they're not safe in any absolute sense, as in your claim. I never claimed abolishing guns would lead to absoute safety. As you point out, there's plenty of senseless violence all over the first world, including gun violence. The difference between America and other places such as Europe, Canada, Australia and NZ is that people elsewhere do not see gun ownership as a necessary prerequisite in order to feel safe. > The problem with your position is not that it's false -- it's very clearly true -- it's that nothing can be done about it. Life is dangerous, and as world population increases, it's becoming more dangerous. It's an existential problem, not a practical one. The problem is that American society glorifies guns and gun violence. A good first step to changing that is to limit gun ownership to people who actually need them: farmers, police, and the military. A good second step is to limit the types of guns that are available; e.g. famers need shotguns, not semi-autos.
  - CamperBob2 14y ago
    Life is dangerous, and as world population increases, it's becoming more dangerous Not even remotely true.

monochromatic 14y ago

AR-15s actually make excellent home defense weapons. 30 rounds on tap, very effective ballistics. And people don't realize it, but 5.56 typically has less overpenetration issues than buckshot.

gradstudent 14y ago

> Why do you want to rely on others for protection? You don't have to search very hard to find stories of peoples houses being broken into, they get assaulted, women raped, etc. I believe that I have the right to protect myself and my family. I don't need an AR-15 to do that, but I think I should be able to own a shotgun. Don't you think there's something seriously wrong with a society that requires people to carry guns in order to feel safe? Focus on fixing that, not protecting your right to bear arms!

lutusp 14y ago
> Don't you think there's something seriously wrong with a society that requires people to carry guns in order to feel safe? Just for the sake of argument, where is that not true? Are you aware that a Swedish prime minister was gunned down in the street (Olof Palme)? And in Norway, a mass murderer has just been sentenced to 21 years for gunning down 77 people. I mention these cases because people tend to think of these Scandinavian countries as polar opposites of gun-crazy America. They are certainly much safer than the U.S. with respect to gun violence, but they're not safe in any absolute sense, as in your claim. The problem with your position is not that it's false -- it's very clearly true -- it's that nothing can be done about it. Life is dangerous, and as world population increases, it's becoming more dangerous. It's an existential problem, not a practical one.
- gradstudent 14y ago
  > I mention these cases because people tend to think of these Scandinavian countries as polar opposites of gun-crazy America. They are certainly much safer than the U.S. with respect to gun violence, but they're not safe in any absolute sense, as in your claim. I never claimed abolishing guns would lead to absoute safety. As you point out, there's plenty of senseless violence all over the first world, including gun violence. The difference between America and other places such as Europe, Canada, Australia and NZ is that people elsewhere do not see gun ownership as a necessary prerequisite in order to feel safe. > The problem with your position is not that it's false -- it's very clearly true -- it's that nothing can be done about it. Life is dangerous, and as world population increases, it's becoming more dangerous. It's an existential problem, not a practical one. The problem is that American society glorifies guns and gun violence. A good first step to changing that is to limit gun ownership to people who actually need them: farmers, police, and the military. A good second step is to limit the types of guns that are available; e.g. famers need shotguns, not semi-autos.
- CamperBob2 14y ago
  Life is dangerous, and as world population increases, it's becoming more dangerous Not even remotely true.