-
My[Confined]Space
Better Than Bread
Movies Coming Soon- Star Trek Books
- “Star Trek: Lower Decks #2” Review by Aiptcomics.com
- AFRO SAMURAI’S Takashi Okazaki Brings Manga Flair to STAR TREK: DEFIANT Comics
- Out Today: “Star Trek: Lower Decks (2024) #2”
- Out Today: “Star Trek #27”
- New Star Trek Book: “Star Trek III: The Search for Spock – The Making of the Classic Film”
- Happy 2024 Birthday to J.M. Dillard!
- “Star Trek: Picard: Firewall” Review by Theforgottenfiction.com
- RIP David A. McIntee
- John Jay Alumnus Derek Attico Discusses New Autobiography at Book Talk
- Preview of “Star Trek: Lower Decks #2”
- Movie Related Products
- ‘Subscribers Were Overwhelmed’: How Disney Made Streaming Profitable
- Silo ordered for full four season run
- “The Muppet Christmas Carol” Review
- Alex Garland at the BFI – The VFX in Civil War | Framestore
- STAR WARS FILIBUSTER: Patton Oswalt’s Rant Animated – Geek Week
- The WWE Network Is Officially Shutting Down Ahead Of Netflix Move
- “Deadpool & Wolverine” Review
- Kevin Smith Is Getting Closer and Closer to Dogma 2
- “The Garfield Movie” Review
- Disney Said to be Considering a Surprising Replacement for Bob Iger: EA CEO Andrew Wilson – IGN
- Music Video DB
This website brought to you by The Tiki Web Group Unless specifically mentioned, we have no clue where this content came from. Know where it came from? Post the link in the comments, and reap the glory! All comments and content are the sole possesion of the commenters and members of the community and do not reflect the opinions or values of MCS.
Why do people think that this is a cogent argument? Have there been any mass school stranglings lately?
What difference does that make? Humans have indeed strangled other humans.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_equivalence
Exactly!
Guns are the cheapest, easiest, quickest most efficient, most convenient way for a single person to kill many other persons. It is the weapon given to each and every soldier of every army in the world when they are deployed to warzones and ordered to kill the enemy.
Guns are so easy to use that they allow the physically weakest individuals to kill several times their number. People who are incapable of physically overcoming other able human beings, people who are too weak or slow to run after other human beings to inflict harm, can easily kill several times their number by using guns.
There are numerous reported instances of children killing adults with guns — children who would never otherwise have the strength, agility, speed or cold-blooded resolve needed to beat, strangle or knife an adult to death.
And yet, God forbid there should be any kind of regulation on the ownership and possession of such lethal instruments.
Shithead criminals most often favor victimizing the physically weakest individuals. Guns are the cheapest, easiest, quickest most efficient, most convenient way for those same people to prevent themselves from becoming victims of violent crime.
There are instances reported daily (not reported widely enough, sadly) of people using guns to deter violent crime. The CDC acknowledges that the number of defensive uses of guns far outnumbers the instances of uses by criminals committing crimes with guns.
Yet there remains that contingent of society that will continue to imply that every gun owner is a criminal lying in wait, even though a scant fraction of the 280 million guns in the U.S. will ever be used to commit a crime.
God forbid we should restrict the law abiding with more fruitless and burdensome regulation of gun ownership when those who wish to do the unthinkable have proven again and again that respect for the law is the last thing to go through their mind. In the end, if every proposed law against gun ownership were passed, we would have a society of victims.
Bring on the down votes.
You just explained why people need guns to protect themselves. Without guns the weak are unable to defend themselves from the strong. Why would you want make people unable to defend themselves from physically more capable agressors?
There is a basic flaw to the argument that no restriction on gun availability or ownership is an absolute requirement in order for the weak and law-abiding to protect themselves: the weak or law-abiding wouldn’t need guns to save their lives if guns were no so available to every criminal and crazy person in the first place.
The mass availability of guns to every individual does not protect the weak and innocent. It makes it easier for the criminal and insane to harm and kill others… to turn everyday people into victims.
The vast majority of criminals and killers are not stopped by armed citizens, they are caught and arrested by law-enforcement. Meanwhile, criminals and killers depend on guns in order to carry out their deeds; guns facilitate their nefarious enterprises.
The criminals and killers that are caught often leave countless victims in their wake; in the case of mass-shootings, the murderers are notorious for inflicting massive casualties before killing themselves. Survival is not an option: killing as many people as possible as quickly as possible is the sole objective.
Is it any wonder that gun deaths occur with with such nightmarish regularity in a society where it is easier to obtain a gun than it is a driver’s permit or liquor license?
Are people better off in a society that requires them to own and carry guns so they can defend their lives in their homes, schools, workplaces or on the street? Or are they better off living in a society where they are not required to carry arms to defend their lives in the first place?
“The criminals and killers that are caught often leave countless victims in their wake; in the case of mass-shootings, the murderers are notorious for inflicting massive casualties before killing themselves. Survival is not an option: killing as many people as possible as quickly as possible is the sole objective.”
Don’t forget that a majority of these nightmare scenarios predictably begin in gun-free zones. They know they have better chances of a high kill count when a slim chance exists that a gun will be pointed right back at them. Insanity and stupidity don’t necessarily go hand in hand.
Law enforcement can’t and usually won’t do anything until a crime has already been committed, meaning there’s already a perpetrator and a victim. If it came down to it, would you rather have yourself and your family end up as victims? Or would you prefer a fighting chance at survival?
There are just too many guns in this country to be able to snap back to the gun-free utopia many delusionals wish for. How do you propose to change that?
www.dailykos.com/story/2013/04/19/1203254/-More-NRA-mythbusting-do-guns-prevent-crime
DailyKos? Really? Really?
The actual study that it’s based on is here:
www.vpc.org/studies/justifiable.pdf