My part in reducing violence is the promotion of programs and structures that promote a more just and egalitarian world.
I hereby invite you to substantiate that dodge by naming the specific programs you are “promoting”.
6 Likes
I don’t ever bother to engage you anymore for good reason, but this needs to be stated emphatically;
Your “right” to own a weapon that has the capacity to maim and kill others is NOWHERE NEAR ‘equal’ to my right to decide what happens to my own fucking body.
PERIOD.
24 Likes
All people carrying in public (concealed or otherwise) should be considered a potentially lethal threat. Avoid, report, or both.
3 Likes
Fuck your false equivalence. There is no fundamental right to concealed carry. At all. I didn’t even wade into where the line for personal gun ownership is because that’s a gross grey are that’s unneeded for the point I’m making. Concealed carry is not the right to carry arms. Concealed carry is not a part of the constitution. Concealed carry can only be tied directly to personal liberty through an extremist lens.
Your rhetoric is the most extreme it could possibly be to take the leap of any restrictions whatsoever on your right to gun ownership (even things that don’t tie to gun ownership) is now a direct attack on all the core liberties of the country. It’s stale and uncritical.
13 Likes
Calibre isn’t everything.
9 Likes
Indeed; that’s possibly one of the most disrespectful, insulting, dehumanizing and downright self-centered comments that I’ve ever read on this site, which as you know, is really saying something.
Regardless that it was couched in ‘polite phrasing,’ such a sentiment is repugnant as fuck.
10 Likes
9 Likes
In fairness, I think you opened up the door to “guns as metaphors for reproductive organs” when you suggested open carry rights were analogous to the right of a woman to control her own uterus.
16 Likes
Indeed, they are quite well regulated.
9 Likes
The most fucking disgusting sick and fundamentally misogynistic comparison I have ever heard in my life. Guns are the opposite of life.
Some people will say anything I guess.
10 Likes
10 Likes
Seriously, it’s a real pattern with that guy.
1 Like
Yeah - because our population has grown. You’re super smart and know the difference between the raw number of something and the actual rate of something.
It’s not a dodge - it’s the truth. Most proposed gun control measures don’t address the core reasons for violence. It’s a feel good band-aid.
ALL of the fucked up systems that have created this mess we are in need an over haul. From banking, to policing, to drug laws, to too high rent and too low wages, to any social program meant to raise all ships being branded as evil socialism.
Seriously the rhetoric I’ve heard is: “We just want legal gun owners to get licenses and registered.” So they set up a both (You need a license and have to register handguns in NYS.) and then they have a “shall issue” license that they never give to anyone unless you’re a cop or an elite. No license for you, pleeb. If they were a non-issue state at least they wouldn’t be hypocritical about it.
1 Like
Maybe one of us will have changed our minds by then but I kinda fucking doubt it.
5 Likes
Total number of automobile deaths went down over the same period.
Guns are uniquely dangerous devices. They are designed to kill and they continue to do so with brutal efficiency, even as other forms of violent death have been on the decline.
13 Likes
It’s like they have literally one purpose…
9 Likes
Based on what we saw with Florida, this probably will not budge the national firearm homicide rate much if it passes. At least, not by itself. You would need expansion of Castle Doctrine laws, or new Stand Your Ground laws (again Florida as the example) to make all those C&C folks feel justified in shooting all those folks that they already kinda wanted to shoot anyways.*
Even then, the size of that problem in Florida after SYG passed is still on the order of just dozens per year. It’s not great, but we’re not going to see 800 Starbucks deaths a year in NYC as a result.
*Don’t get me wrong, I am sure that will be the next BS case the 2A folks put in front of SCOTUS if they win this one.
Oh come now - those terms have been bandied around in threads I didn’t even reply on. It is abundantly clear the stereotype many subscribe to or spout off as a way to let off steam. Just some some good ol’ self depreciation.
Rights are rights. I never claimed one was more important or even as important - just that they both were important. The core point was: “respecting state’s rights” isn’t a viable position when a state law is violating one’s rights. If one hates that example - fill in any other example you care to where you think a state law is bullshit and violates people’s rights.
Probably not - but then again that’s, like, the whole internet, isn’t it?
Yep, due to better safety laws on car construction and better roads and that most car deaths are accidents.
In my failed effort to try to relate unfamiliar risks to risks the average person is familiar with, to give some perspectives of the actual danger, I have learned it just doesn’t translate. Even if one can see the numbers are similar, the comfort of the familiar risk one doesn’t even think about completely disconnects from the scary unknown risks. I have been told repeatedly they don’t compare to one another. But hey, turn about is fair play!
I guess most gun owners are stupid and using theirs wrong 
But at least if you live in NYS you can rest easy only cops and the privileged few are conceal carrying.
1 Like
