Run, you fucking piece of shit. Go go go gogogogogogog!

My niece told her grandmother about her fear of getting murdered at school. Feel that fear, asshole.

  • kescusay@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    177
    ·
    9 months ago

    Wait, you mean he wasn’t suddenly transformed into a good-guy action hero with a gun? I’m shocked! Shocked, I tell you!

    • crusa187@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      60
      ·
      9 months ago

      This event only marks the beginning of his metamorphosis.

      In the future, when an unsuspecting minority youth mistakenly knocks on his mansion’s gate, the transformation will be complete.

      • PoliticalAgitator@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        9 months ago

        Don’t be ridiculous. They spend tens of millions of dollars a year to have other people lie to us.

        Remember kids, you can’t buy a gun without donating to the Republican Party.

  • Whiskey_iicarus@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    90
    ·
    9 months ago

    I would love to be wrong, but it’s too bad one of the injured or killed weren’t connected to the governor. That seems to be the only time some people give a shit.

      • ceenote@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        57
        ·
        9 months ago

        “Clearly, the 800 police officers that were there weren’t enough. 1,600 cops would have made those villains think twice!”

      • TenderfootGungi@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        9 months ago

        If you had a gun would you pull it? There were likely hundreds of guns there. But there was also hundreds of police officers ready to take down anyone with a gun.

        • gregorum@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          17
          ·
          edit-2
          9 months ago

          At least two of the shooters were taken down by unarmed bystanders who immediately tackled them to the ground.

          • agitatedpotato@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            edit-2
            9 months ago

            Not an option you have if theres people between you and the shooter like a dense crowd, and firing through a crowd is general frowned upon, even when you’re trying to not hit them. The last thing you do if you have a gun in that situation is pull it out before you have cover and know where the threat is coming from or your will absolutely be shot by the cops if not the shooter. Dense crowding also played a part in why they were able to be tackled to the ground. A lot harder to get close if the shooting starts and no one’s physically near the shooter.

        • Luci@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          9 months ago

          Lol the fuck would I want a gun for? I think you misunderstood my sarcasm

        • AbidanYre@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          9 months ago

          But I keep being told that these mass shooters only target gun free zones because they’re easy targets.

      • Coasting0942@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        9 months ago

        Whimper… if only the federal government hadn’t banned sales of Milkor MGLs to the public, my relative would still be alive now.

    • jjjalljs@ttrpg.network
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      9 months ago

      I was reading a book about how people change their minds and this is true. Horrible trauma is one of the ways people change.

  • tsonfeir@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    77
    ·
    9 months ago

    So the solution to getting republicans on the side of gun control is just… shooting at them? I can get behind that.

    • PM_Your_Nudes_Please@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      83
      ·
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      I mean, it worked for the Black Panthers, and they weren’t even trying to get gun control laws put in place.

      For the unaware, modern gun control laws basically started with the Black Panthers. During the civil rights movement, peaceful protests would get violently busted by the cops. But people quickly noticed that heavily armed protests would have the cops politely watching from across the street. (Turns out, cops are way less likely to fire into a crowd when the entire crowd can immediately return fire.) So the Black Panthers started arming themselves, to keep the cops from shutting down their protests.

      When Republican lawmakers realized that the cops weren’t going to shut down the heavily armed protests on their front lawns, they got really fucking sweaty, really fucking fast. So conservatives pushed the Mulford Act, which was (at the time) the most restrictive gun control law the country had ever seen. It was authored by Ronald Reagan (yes, the same Reagan that the right upholds as a paragon of conservative values) and endorsed by the NRA, (yes, the same NRA that lobbies for looser gun control in the wake of mass school shootings.) All because the wrong people had guns.

      The goal of the Mulford Act was to criminalize gun ownership, so the cops could bust individual protesters after the fact, instead of needing to break up an entire protest as it was happening. And it basically set the stage for modern gun control laws. The cops would follow individual protesters home, and kick in their front door while they were having dinner with their family the next evening. This is ironically what led to the Black Panthers becoming so militant, as they implemented anti-espionage tactics to protect the group. Code names, so busted members wouldn’t be able to positively identify other members by name. Segmented information, so a busted member (even a high ranking member) wouldn’t be able to compromise an entire protest. Randomized meeting locations, so cops couldn’t set up stings ahead of time. Etc, etc… It took them from “the people who really like guns and peacefully protest with them for self defense” to “a full blown armed guerrilla-protest group.”

      • derphurr@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        16
        ·
        edit-2
        9 months ago

        "I don’t see any peaceful way to disarm America’s whites. There’s only one thing that’s going to save this country from itself. Same thing that always saves this country from itself. And that is African-Americans. And I know the question a lot of y’all have in your minds is, should we do it? Fuck yeah, we should do it.”

        “No matter what they say or how they make you feel, remember, this is your country, too. It is incumbent upon us to save our country. And you know what we have to do"

        "Every able-bodied African-American must register for a legal firearm. That’s the only way they’ll change the law.”

        – Dave Chappelle (2019)

    • RGB3x3@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      26
      ·
      9 months ago

      They never are. And by “they,” I mean everyone who carries a gun for “protection,” and by “never,” I mean that the good guy with a gun almost never actually stops shootings.

      Just look at the numbers of justifiable homicides vs the number of murders by guns in the US. The justifiable homicides are almost statistically insignificant in comparison.

      • PoliticalAgitator@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        9 months ago

        I mean that the good guy with a gun almost never actually stops shootings

        Last I looked, they had a lower success rate than unarmed people.

        • EatATaco@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          10
          ·
          9 months ago

          Last I looked, they had a lower success rate than unarmed people.

          I’m a firm support of much strong gun control laws, and so this claim is something I would really love to be true …which is exactly why I’m pausing here and asking to see the evidence. Confirmation bias is a hell of a drug.

          So what is this based on?

          • PoliticalAgitator@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            9 months ago

            It was a while back, so i can’t remember the caveats (if any). It may have been for that year or something. A quick dig looks like it holds up though.

            This media investigation, aided by Texas State University shows the stats.

            According to the data, citizens stopped shooters 50 times in the 316 attacks. But in only 10 out of those 50 incidents did citizens actually stop the shooter by using a gun. The other 40 times, it was with their hands or another weapon.

            It also briefly touches on the trauma when an actual good person kills someone.

            “I don’t feel like I killed a human,” says Wilson. “I killed an evil and that’s how I’m coping with the situation.”

            “The individual did not make any attempt to get up because of his head wound. He didn’t make any… it was just quivering and that was it.”

            He is actively forcing himself to not see the shooter as a person and it’s clear the image of the person he killed twitching on the ground will haunt him forever.

            The pro-gun crowd didn’t save that man, they sold him and everybody else in that church out. They armed the mass shooter then used Wilson as propaganda, claiming his trauma is actually the gold standard for dealing with gun violence and that teachers and targeted minorities should be enthusiastically following suit.

            I’m sure the fact that it would preserve or increase the profits of a lobby group that gives $16 million a year to Republicans is purely coincidence.

            After all, if an industry was causing massive social harm, they’d immediately cease operation for the public good, not suppress research and statistics about how many people they’d killled while astroturfing and hiring politicians as shills.

            • EatATaco@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              9 months ago

              But in only 10 out of those 50 incidents did citizens actually stop the shooter by using a gun.

              And this begs the question. . .what percentage of people actually carry a gun? If it’s less than 20% then that means gun owners were more effective at stopping it (well, it would actually be more complicated, but I’m just trying to demonstrate my point).

              • PoliticalAgitator@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                9 months ago

                Not only is it more complicated, it doesn’t even matter.

                Around 80% of mass shooters bought the guns legally. Of the 20% remaining, the majority are teenagers who used their parent’s legally owned firearm.

                Criminals in America have better access to firearms than they do in anywhere else in the world, with many of the guns in South America being originally purchased from a store in the United States.

                This has resulted in a homicide rate that is far higher than it should be. Sort this list by homicide rate and take note of just how far before and after “United States” you have to scroll before finding a country you would consider “wealthy and stable”.

                As compensation for that, we’re told things like “the only thing that can stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun”. But the “good guys” have been given all the guns they want and they stop exactly fuck all. It’s not even close to the number of shootings they enable.

                So who gives a fuck how “effective” they are on paper? In the real world, police and unarmed civilians stop more mass shooters and it doesn’t require arming the mass shooters in the first place.

                • EatATaco@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  9 months ago

                  So who gives a fuck how “effective” they are on paper?

                  If it doesn’t matter, why did you bring it up?

        • octopus_ink@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          21
          ·
          9 months ago

          The goal of defensive use of a gun isn’t homicide

          That’s interesting because I was always told never to point a gun at anything I didn’t want to kill.

          • bluewing@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            9 months ago

            “Defensive use” does not implicitly imply pointing and shooting a gun at anyone. Often merely showing a holstered firearm will cause the bad guy to leave quickly because no one wants to get shot. This IS a defensive use of a firearm in the clearest sense. And in such a scenario, it will not make the news for you to hear about nor is it likely to even be reported to law enforcement. And this is more likely to happen than drawing and shooting - because very few people actually want the extreme problems that will follow. Shooting someone is the last resort.

            As far the this governor running away well, as governor it was very unlikely he was armed - he has a security detail carrying the guns for him, (just like any liberal person with money or power). And secondly, if you’ve ever taken a self-defense class for a carry permit, there is a checklist of things to do BEFORE you draw and shoot. And guess what, running away if at all possible is at the top of the list…

            Still, this guy is an idiot and much like most loud idiots no matter their political beliefs they get the most ink. But there is more to this argument than the circle jerk that is happening here. You are a liberal thinker and probably pride yourself on being smarter and more intellectually honest. Be what you believe you are. Otherwise, you are no better than this clown.

            • octopus_ink@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              6
              ·
              edit-2
              9 months ago

              You are a liberal thinker and probably pride yourself on being smarter and more intellectually honest. Be what you believe you are. Otherwise, you are no better than this clown.

              I was raised around guns. Had some (superficial) training in the military with guns. I’m not a gun owner now, but while I think R and the right in general are absolutely culpable regarding our gun violence problems due to their refusal to acknowledge them or do a damn thing about them, I’m not anti-2A, and not being disingenuous with my comment here.

              I was told by everyone who was ever responsible for training me in gun safety that you don’t pull it out unless you are prepared to use it, and you should not be prepared to use it unless you are prepared to kill with it. I was also taught that brandishing was illegal, and more likely to escalate than defuse a situation.

                • octopus_ink@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  9 months ago

                  I’m not going to redo this entire discussion. You can see the other replies in this same comment chain that trod the same ground.

              • bluewing@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                9 months ago

                The brandishing part is why it’s not reported or on the news. But that does not mean it doesn’t happen successfully.

                • octopus_ink@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  5
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  9 months ago

                  So one of the best uses of a weapon defensively is to break fundamental gun safety rules that are in literally every gun safety course (and the law)? Aren’t R the party of law and order?

            • PoliticalAgitator@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              9 months ago

              Often merely showing a holstered firearm will cause the bad guy to leave quickly because no one wants to get shot.

              They can’t be too concerned since the crime rate in America is functionally identical to countries with gun control (except there is much more murder).

              The rest of your comment just undermines the gun laws you’re trying to defend, functionally claiming “We need to keep selling guns to the public to keep them safe from the people we’ve sold guns to, but only if they can’t run away or hide, even if they have a gun or a team of people with guns”.

        • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          9 months ago

          The person you are most likely to use a gun on is yourself.

          The second most likely person you are to use a gun on is your spouse, with men overwhelmingly preferring firearms as a form of spousal homicide.

          The third most likely person you are to use a gun on is a family/tenant.

          Home invaders are way down on the list of “at-home gun use” targets. And, to make things even more stick, police tend to be more concerned with facing an armed resident than actual burglars. This leads to a high rate of police homicides ruled justifiable, on the grounds that the officer entering the home believed that the resident possessed a gun.

          So, we’re looking at a solid four different likely ways keeping a gun in your home will result in the death of you or another lawful resident of your house.

        • PoliticalAgitator@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          9 months ago

          I don’t know, shooting an unarmed teenager in the head and claiming you were scared makes it sound like homicide is the point for some people.

  • chiliedogg@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    49
    ·
    9 months ago

    Things to do during a mas shooting:

    1. Try to escape
    2. If you can’t escape, hide.
    3. If you can’t escape or hide, fight back.

    Supporting gun ownership or even carrying a gun on your hip doesn’t change that. All carrying a gun does for you in a mass shooting is mature the odds a little less terrible if it comes to option 3.

    A handgun is imprecise, low-power, and difficult to aim accurately. On top of that a “good guy with a gun” has to care about collateral damage.

    The purpose of carrying a handgun is personal defense, not civil defense. It’s good defense against assault or a mugger. It’s a good deterrent from someone who why’s to harm you and walk away. It’s not good for taking on an unhinged maniac that’s fully intending to die.

    Mass shooters are the suicide bombers of the US.

    • catalog3115@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      You don’t get the main point of gun control. Gun control means vetting out bad people from getting the guns. Like driver’s license, if you don’t know how drive or regularly violated traffic regulations your license is revoked. Similarly if you have gun license, good people with proper training can get the gun. But people who don’t follow laws will be banned from getting guns.

  • EatATaco@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    36
    ·
    9 months ago

    This strikes me as like implying that I’m hypocritical because I support gay marriage, but then turned down a man who hits on me because im not actually gay.

    A person can be pro gun rights and at the same time still be afraid of an active shooter.

    • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      24
      ·
      9 months ago

      I’m hypocritical because I support gay marriage, but then turned down a man who hits on me because im not actually gay.

      It would be ironic to loudly and repeatedly declare “If you don’t want to get hit on at a bar, put on that wedding ring” and then get chased out of a bar by a bunch of married men slapping your ass.

      A person can be pro gun rights and at the same time still be afraid of an active shooter.

      A person who stakes their reputation on the phrase “An Armed Society Is A Polite Society” fleeing said armed society for their lack of politeness establishes a certain hypocrisy.

    • yata@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      Who is saying anything about hypocrisy? This is about the guy feeling the consequences for his shitty policies.

      • EatATaco@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        9 months ago

        2 of the top 5 comments right now are attacking him for not being the “good guy with a gun” and arguably multiple people have challenged me to defend the implicit claims of hypocrisy. So I disagree the implication isn’t there.

    • NatakuNox@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      9 months ago

      Apples to oranges argument and a straw man argument all in one. Bravo sir, brav-fucking-o. Yall never cease to amaze me.

      • EatATaco@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        edit-2
        9 months ago

        You could explain why, but that would actually take thought and effort and open your position up to being challenged, which is scary. I get it. Empty insults are much easier.

        • NatakuNox@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          14
          ·
          9 months ago

          When a gay man “sets his sights” on you, death isn’t a possible outcome. So supporting gay people isn’t a life threatening position to hold. It’s just the right fucking thing to do. However, Being full on pro gun does come with the inevitable death of someone. This politician made it so the exact people who shouldn’t have a gun, would have one. If you are a responsible gun owner than good on you. Please by all means keep your guns, but is it truly too much to ask that you at least take the time to be background checked before getting another gun? Or maybe take a few classes on gun safety? Or be legally required to have it stored in a place away from children and the mentally unstable?

          • EatATaco@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            9 months ago

            So supporting gay people isn’t a life threatening position to hold. It’s just the right fucking thing to do.

            It’s funny how often it happens that when someone falsely accuses of doing something, they are really projecting what they have already done, or are warning you of what they’re about to do.

            In this case, attacking a strawman. I certainly did not say that they are equivalent when it comes to life and death. It’s like you forgotten basic SAT logic (or whatever equivalent test you took). Square : rectangle is like murder : homicide. This doesn’t mean that I think all murders have 4 equal sides and 4 right angles.

            I was very clear I was talking about the implicit hypocrisy.

            And ftr, I’m a firm supporter of stronger gun regulations so the whole rant about what gun regulations you want has zero to do with the point, and reels of just pandering to the opinion of the typical Lemmy user.

            • NatakuNox@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              9 months ago

              you berate me for not fully explaining my position and then come back with a full explanation of your original comment? Just saying sorry I did see through your initial response and should have been more clear in my first comment. I’ll personally try to do better.

              • EatATaco@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                9 months ago

                you berate me for not fully explaining my position and then come back with a full explanation of your original comment?

                First, you were an asshole to me out of the gates, so expecting me to kind to you when you misrepresent my position is kind of bizarre. But never the less, you are correct I should have still stayed respectful, so I too apologize for my response.

                But this is what I do when someone doesn’t understand, whether it’s their fault or mine, I try to explain it another way.

  • DevCat@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    36
    ·
    9 months ago

    “…Governor & First Lady Parson want to thank the Missouri Highway Patrol, KCPD, and their security officers for their quick and professional actions.”

    For getting our own asses out of there, while leaving everyone else to fend for themselves.

    “I just ran away from a mass shooting at the Chiefs parade where I saw the Missouri governor (the gun lover below) running scared for his life next to me with an army of officers protecting him,” Quaife wrote"

  • cmoney@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    33
    ·
    9 months ago

    Now that we’re in election season I see political ads for Republicans running for various things on TV, almost all of them show them brandishing or firing some sort of military style assault weapon. These politicians spew bullshit about protecting kids but instead are a big reason why we now have so many dead ones .

  • Shenanigore@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    31
    ·
    9 months ago

    This isn’t a “gotcha”. I’m a big fan of classic cars but that doesn’t mean I’ll stand there when one is driving fast straight at me.

    • goetzit@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      59
      ·
      9 months ago

      I mean most pro-gun arguments boil down to “guns are needed because the only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with one”, so when a large proponent of this argument is thrown into a situation where he could be the “good guy with a gun” and he instead runs away because he values his own life more than protecting the lives of those around him, maybe he should stop and dwell on that thought for a minute.

      Would I charge headfirst into gunfire? Absolutely not, and thats why I advocate for more gun control.

      • ZeroPoke@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        9 months ago

        Maybe he’s just not a good guy. In fact in this day and age I would say by being Republican does indeed make him the bad guy.

      • Shenanigore@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        edit-2
        9 months ago

        Perhaps he simply wasn’t armed. I’m against gun control but am also not armed 24/7 either. Unlike most on the website, I’ve been in the situation of having to approach a shooter. Some of us still believe what we did before that after.

        • goetzit@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          9 months ago

          Well good on you for getting through that situation, but you saying “oh, well maybe he just wasnt carrying” doesn’t really help your point. We can’t expect everyone to be carrying, at all times. And even if everyone could carry at all times, we still can’t expect everyone to be able to pull the trigger. You did, but that’s why people in your role are hailed as heroes for what they do: because most could not do it.

      • Dead_or_Alive@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        9 months ago

        I carry to protect me and mine.

        You and yours can make the decision to carry or not. I’m not going to go out of my way to save anyone but my own kin. The police have no legal requirement to save you and they have legal protection from liability if they shoot something they should not. A conceal and carry holder has none of that.

        • goetzit@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          9 months ago

          So your solution to the issue of mass shootings is that everyone should carry a gun on them at all times, and everyone should be ready to kill if necessary? And you don’t see the issue with that?

          I’m not saying you specifically should not carry or be ready to defend yourself, and I would be a fool to pretend that you shouldn’t be willing and able to defend yourself, especially with how things are now. But do you really want to live in a world where every citizen has to be ready and willing to kill his fellow man at the drop of a hat when things go to shit? Do you want your kids, grandkids, etc. to live in a world like that?

          The point isn’t that you shouldn’t be able to defend yourself. The point is that the fact that you need to is fucked up, and we shouldn’t accept it as the status quo.

          • Dead_or_Alive@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            9 months ago

            My solution is to treat the cause. Mental Health and crime are certainly the two leading causes of mass shootings.

            A living wage, universal healthcare services, and a fair regulated economy Are solutions to the cause of the problem.

            I am not a liberal, I am a leftist. I think we have moved far too much to the right in this country which is why we have many of these problems in the first place.

        • nomous@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          9 months ago

          So you don’t give a fuck if anyone lives except your “kin” and we’re supposed to feel safe with people like you walking around armed?

          • Dead_or_Alive@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            9 months ago

            You are free to ensure your own safety. If you choose to depend upon others that is certainly your decision to make.

            Statistically conceal and carry holders are the safest segment of society. I would much rather be in a room full of registered conceal, and carry holders than police, or any other segment of society.

        • corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          9 months ago

          That’s cute from a casual. I love the light anarchy manifesto.

          Now that I don’t carry an automatic weapon for part of my work, I see no reason to be part of the problem and I’m happy to leave it to the pros. But dunning-kruger is a hell of a thing.

          • Dead_or_Alive@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            9 months ago

            Feel free to trust your personal safety and the safety of your family to a “pro”. When seconds count the police are just 20 minutes away.

        • Honytawk@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          9 months ago

          Damn, you must live in a shithole if you need a gun in order to feel safe in your own country and home.

          • Dead_or_Alive@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            9 months ago

            It sounds like you are privileged to live in an area bereft of all violence. Those of us who are not as privileged as you are still want to defend ourselves.

    • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      9 months ago

      I assume you’re not a big fan of totally unregulated cars and I doubt you claim that the only way to stop a car crash is with another car.