Opinion of gun ownership

[dead0man]

he's not arguing that the Nazis took the guns, he's arguing that the Jews (and southern blacks) didn't have guns.  It's subtle, it might still be wrong, but it is different.  I doubt having guns would have saved the German Jews in 1942 or southern blacks in 1875 (they would have had a much better chance than the Jews based just off of the numbers), but it would have given the racists second thoughts, it would have taken a few of them out.  It would have hurt the bad people, even if it didn't stop them.

I'd rather die in a shootout, surrounded by my family, than die in an oven alone, after several years of cruelty and hopelessness and not knowing what became of my family.

[Ferguson97]

he's not arguing that the Nazis took the guns, he's arguing that the Jews (and southern blacks) didn't have guns.  It's subtle, it might still be wrong, but it is different.  I doubt having guns would have saved the German Jews in 1942 or southern blacks in 1875 (they would have had a much better chance than the Jews based just off of the numbers), but it would have given the racists second thoughts, it would have taken a few of them out.  It would have hurt the bad people, even if it didn't stop them.

I'd rather die in a shootout, surrounded by my family, than die in an oven alone, after several years of cruelty and hopelessness and not knowing what became of my family.

The point is that it's a stupid argument, because the reason slaves didn't have guns wasn't because of "gun control laws" it was because they didn't think slaves were human beings.

[Velasco]

Strict gun control and comprehensive legislation are the only way to prevent mass shootings and insecurity. Why don' t you focus this discussion on the rights of the sane unarmed citizens?

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

almost all sides of this debate annoy me: cosplaying radicals who believe they can overthrow the government with a mush of Jefferson and Marx quotes; pious liberals and Europeans who believe they are better than gun owning barbarians; hotheaded gun maniacs who seem alternately too angry or stupid not to own a firearm without shooting either their spouse or their own feet etc. My solution is to just get some bloodless technocrats to come up with some laws; poll them to find whatever can be passed without public opposition and forget about the issue.

[Big Abraham]

he's not arguing that the Nazis took the guns, he's arguing that the Jews (and southern blacks) didn't have guns.  It's subtle, it might still be wrong, but it is different.  I doubt having guns would have saved the German Jews in 1942 or southern blacks in 1875 (they would have had a much better chance than the Jews based just off of the numbers), but it would have given the racists second thoughts, it would have taken a few of them out.  It would have hurt the bad people, even if it didn't stop them.

I'd rather die in a shootout, surrounded by my family, than die in an oven alone, after several years of cruelty and hopelessness and not knowing what became of my family.

The point is that it's a stupid argument, because the reason slaves didn't have guns wasn't because of "gun control laws" it was because they didn't think slaves were human beings.

You're making two different arguments here, that are not connected with my original premise in any way.

Also, regardless of whether or not the blacks were seen on an equal footing with whites doesn't change the fact they were still being deprived of the right to bear arms. Also, they weren't legally slaves any more during the time of Jim Crow

[fhtagn]

Exactly. I just think that it is a bad idea for civilians to own guns, unless they are shooting deer or something. Shooting intruders is morally wrong.

lol, there is literally no right more fundamental than self-defense.

Canadians do fine without it and have a democracy. Right to bear arms applies only to white people when you think about it.

You are either the new dumbest poster on Atlas or you are a sock.

When I was referring to race, I was talking about how white people with guns subjugated black people in the south under Jim Crow.

They probably could've resisted that subjugation if they had guns

You're usually a smart guy, but this is one of the most ludicrous things I've ever seen.

What exactly do you object to?

tbh he likely just doesn't like the idea of scary blacks owning guns

[Nightcore Nationalist]

lol, there is literally no right more fundamental than self-defense.
[/quote]

plus to Texasgurl's point about self defense.  If a family member/spouse lived in a high-crime area, I'd feel alot better if they concealed carry.  Excluding suicides and gang shootings (basically 3/4 of the gun death statistic)


If you burgle somebody's home,  you've rescinded your right to not have people use force against you.  Whoever lives there has probable cause that you intend to harm them, and are generally justified in using force against you.

The point is that it's a stupid argument, because the reason slaves didn't have guns wasn't because of "gun control laws" it was because they didn't think slaves were human beings.

So, you believe the ridiculous and absurd myth that the 2A exists for the sole benefit of Slave owners and slave patrols?  If true, then enough said.

[Alcibiades]

he's not arguing that the Nazis took the guns, he's arguing that the Jews (and southern blacks) didn't have guns.  It's subtle, it might still be wrong, but it is different.  I doubt having guns would have saved the German Jews in 1942 or southern blacks in 1875 (they would have had a much better chance than the Jews based just off of the numbers), but it would have given the racists second thoughts, it would have taken a few of them out.  It would have hurt the bad people, even if it didn't stop them.

I'd rather die in a shootout, surrounded by my family, than die in an oven alone, after several years of cruelty and hopelessness and not knowing what became of my family.

The problem was that the Nazis and the SA, while they were still private citizens, had access to guns and could build up a private army which basically let them intimidate themselves into power. Weimar was fundamentally weakened because extremists on all sides were armed and itching for a fight; this is why the “the only thing that can stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun” argument is flawed; an arms race among the citizenry will undermine peaceful, free and democratic society.

The 2A is far more likely to facilitate some nutters attempting to overthrow or murder non-tyrannical leaders and politicians than it is to help overthrow a tyrannical government.

[DC Al Fine]

Why would a normal person even need a gun, unless they are hunting game?

Do normal people hunt? We can buy meat at the butcher's or at the supermarket

Yes? At least in my neck of the woods.

I can buy booze at the liquor store, but I still make my own wine and cider. It's fun, and it tastes better if you worked to get it. Same goes for hunting.

[Senator Incitatus]

Highly dependent on circumstance, obviously.

[Samof94]

he's not arguing that the Nazis took the guns, he's arguing that the Jews (and southern blacks) didn't have guns.  It's subtle, it might still be wrong, but it is different.  I doubt having guns would have saved the German Jews in 1942 or southern blacks in 1875 (they would have had a much better chance than the Jews based just off of the numbers), but it would have given the racists second thoughts, it would have taken a few of them out.  It would have hurt the bad people, even if it didn't stop them.

I'd rather die in a shootout, surrounded by my family, than die in an oven alone, after several years of cruelty and hopelessness and not knowing what became of my family.

The point is that it's a stupid argument, because the reason slaves didn't have guns wasn't because of "gun control laws" it was because they didn't think slaves were human beings.

You're making two different arguments here, that are not connected with my original premise in any way.

Also, regardless of whether or not the blacks were seen on an equal footing with whites doesn't change the fact they were still being deprived of the right to bear arms. Also, they weren't legally slaves any more during the time of Jim Crow

Sharecroping was little better and the KKK was a persistent danger.

[John Henry Eden]

Yes, You're right to defend your life and property is essential to a fair and just society.

[AGA]

Rules restricting gun ownership under 21 are bull****. Either you're an adult or you aren't.

[Samof94]

Why would a normal person even need a gun, unless they are hunting game?

Do normal people hunt? We can buy meat at the butcher's or at the supermarket

Yes? At least in my neck of the woods.

I can buy booze at the liquor store, but I still make my own wine and cider. It's fun, and it tastes better if you worked to get it. Same goes for hunting.

Shooting a deer under strict rules is quite different than shooting a human.

[jaymichaud]

Yes.