Conversation

Notices

1. エイリアン,　あなたのエイリアン (guizzy@social.guizzyordi.info)'s status on Monday, 06-Nov-2017 23:14:33 UTC エイリアン,　あなたのエイリアン

   • delores
   • skoll
   @skoll @delores When I bring this up, the counter-argument I receive is systematically: "but cars are useful/necessary, while guns are only useful for killing". There are two traps there: if you argue that they can be used hunting, you'll be pushed towards accepting regulation to restrict handguns or guns or accessories not typically used for hunting. If you argue for recreational shooting, you will be made to feel bad that your "little hobby" or "object fetish" is getting people killed (you'll get that from people who think Jim Jefferies is an expert on guns).
   
   The tougher, but correct course of action is to maintain that self-defense using a gun is not only socially acceptable, but happens a hell of a lot more often than they believe. Use the "but you hate and don't trust cops!" argument, the "when seconds count, the police are only minutes away" argument, and the "cops and ex-military tend to support private ownership and carry, so clearly the experts believe in gun self-defense" argument.
   • 御園はくい repeated this.
   • エイリアン,　あなたのエイリアン (guizzy@social.guizzyordi.info)'s status on Tuesday, 07-Nov-2017 00:41:11 UTC エイリアン,　あなたのエイリアン

     • delores
     • skoll
     @skoll @delores One of the things you might hear is "if someone is mugging you then don't resist, guns only increase the danger!". To which the answer is: "if someone is mugging you, they are already clearly irrational actors. Possibly on drugs, or in dire need of drugs. How certain are you that they won't freak out and kill you anyway if you cooperate, because they think you can identify them?"
     御園はくい repeated this.