I doubt you realized it when you wrote that, but you specifically identified the actual problem. Poverty. The injustice of our economic model. The victims of that problem are two orders of magnitude greater than anything guns have ever caused.
Your nonsense about being your own best defense has nothing to do with anything that was discussed.
It does, actually. I’m not actually speaking about defending yourself. I’m talking about your mindset. I’m talking about the philosophical model required for your arguments to make sense.
It was truly a strange tangent,
From the mindset of a professional victim, yes, I can see how that would seem strange. Clearly, I don’t share your mindset. I can only assume you lack the imagination or optimism to consider a mindset of empowerment, which is apparently tangent to your current philosophy.
In all the examples you gave (with the exception of children in school), your “prisoners” have that mindset specifically because they are unarmed. They have no hope and no viable means of stopping their abusers.
The situation you describe is bleak and desperate, and only made worse by the solutions you offer.
You got it Sherlock, it is poverty and easy access to guns that causes a large part of the issue. Then you go derpy again.
You have no fucking clue of my mindset. That is some pretty good straw man your constructing this whole time.
Why don’t I start imagining your mindset? Oh wait we already know, LARPing defense scenarios.
Professional victim!? Good Lord you are one of those right wing incel fucks or you just talk like them.
Oh no, they may be unarmed like everyone modern society. How bleak and desperate. We should give everyone a gun so it can be fun and colorful.
How many moar guns until we are safe!? We already have more guns than people. Do we need ten times maybe? Don’t even bother, it is already clear you might take this seriously.
Oh no, they may be unarmed like everyone modern society.
Ah, yes. Schrödinger’s Glock.
Guns are everywhere, but nobody actually has them. Their existence and prevalence aren’t deterministic values, but dependent entirely on whatever point the hoplophobe is trying to make at any particular moment in time.
I doubt you realized it when you wrote that, but you specifically identified the actual problem. Poverty. The injustice of our economic model. The victims of that problem are two orders of magnitude greater than anything guns have ever caused.
It does, actually. I’m not actually speaking about defending yourself. I’m talking about your mindset. I’m talking about the philosophical model required for your arguments to make sense.
From the mindset of a professional victim, yes, I can see how that would seem strange. Clearly, I don’t share your mindset. I can only assume you lack the imagination or optimism to consider a mindset of empowerment, which is apparently tangent to your current philosophy.
In all the examples you gave (with the exception of children in school), your “prisoners” have that mindset specifically because they are unarmed. They have no hope and no viable means of stopping their abusers.
The situation you describe is bleak and desperate, and only made worse by the solutions you offer.
You got it Sherlock, it is poverty and easy access to guns that causes a large part of the issue. Then you go derpy again.
You have no fucking clue of my mindset. That is some pretty good straw man your constructing this whole time.
Why don’t I start imagining your mindset? Oh wait we already know, LARPing defense scenarios.
Professional victim!? Good Lord you are one of those right wing incel fucks or you just talk like them.
Oh no, they may be unarmed like everyone modern society. How bleak and desperate. We should give everyone a gun so it can be fun and colorful.
How many moar guns until we are safe!? We already have more guns than people. Do we need ten times maybe? Don’t even bother, it is already clear you might take this seriously.
Ah, yes. Schrödinger’s Glock.
Guns are everywhere, but nobody actually has them. Their existence and prevalence aren’t deterministic values, but dependent entirely on whatever point the hoplophobe is trying to make at any particular moment in time.