I hate people who treat them like some toys and fantasize about them. That makes me think they are in some sort of death cult. That they found socially acceptable way to love violence.

I would still get one for safety but it is a tool made for specifically one thing. To pierce the skin and rip through the inner organs of a person.

They can serve a good purpose but they are fundamentally grim tools of pain and suffering. They shouldn’t be celebrated and glorified in their own right, that is sick. They can be used to preserve something precious but at a price to pay.

  • Rivalarrival
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    4 months ago

    Guns make it possible for anyone to kill anyone. Without them, the capacity to inflict death is far less egalitarian.

    Hate them all you want; I trust you with guns far more than I trust some angry meathead who doesn’t understand the concept of “No.”

    • Allero
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      4 months ago

      Except it’s normally the angry meathead who ends up having that very gun.

    • Mojojojo1993@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      4 months ago

      Guns create violence.

      Crossbows have a similar ideology.

      They turned a woman into a killer, a child. The frail the weak. Anyone could unclip a bolt to the face and kill.

      But crossbows are obvious. You can’t sneak them into schools.

      If you want guns. Why ?

      To kill pests ? Then rifles not handguns. Rifles are harder to sneak

      • Rivalarrival
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        4 months ago

        But crossbows are obvious.

        Correct.

        They are so obvious that even the angry meathead who doesn’t understand the concept of “No” is capable of comprehending the danger of using his muscles against the woman wielding a crossbow: he’s going to take a bolt to the face.

        And he’s capable of recognizing when another woman is not wielding a crossbow. And he’s capable of recognizing he faces no danger from that second woman. He’s not going to take a bolt to the face.

        When that angry meathead learns that a lot of women are “sneaking” handguns, he doesn’t know whether he is going to take a bullet to the face. He is sufficiently motivated to learn the meaning of “No”.

        • Mojojojo1993@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          4 days ago

          So explain every other country.

          Explain school shootings.

          For the potential that a man might. Might not lay hands because hand fins exist.

          Pathetic stupidity

          • Rivalarrival
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            3 days ago

            The only argument you can make that will demonstrate your point is that you, yourself, would shoot me if given the opportunity.

            I trust that you won’t do that. I trust that I don’t need to deprive you of firearms, because you are not a psychopath.

            Feel free to disabuse me of that notion.