Reply to What does it take to get a little gun control

Forum Index » Political Discussion

Reply to "What does it take to get a little gun control "

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]We sacrifice 40,000 people to the automobile a year, and driving isn't even mentioned in the Constitution. So probably some multiple of that. [/quote]

That’s a false equivalency though.  Driving has multiple prosocial purposes.  Guns have one purpose: killing.

Mass shootings aren’t an accidental byproduct of some other activity, they [i]are[/i] the activity.[/quote]

I wouldn't call driving a prosocial activity though. Not on an individual or social level. The car has led to the destruction of the American landscape, the isolation of people from their communities and a crushing financial burden. The car kills people, cities and nations. Guns only kill people. [/quote]

Let’s not conflate metaphorical killing of cities with literal killing of people.  That’s irrelevant.

Guns are designed to murder, and marketed as such.  Cars are not advertised based on how many pedestrians they can mow down.[/quote]

Guns are no more "designed to murder" than cars are designed to kill other drivers and pedestrians.  Both can be used for legal and valid purposes, or abused.  The variable is the operator, and that's where the focus should be, not on the instrument they use improperly.  [/quote]

Of course guns are designed to murder.  I guess you could use one as a paperweight, but that isn’t its primary function.[/quote]

Does a hunter murder or kill a deer?[/quote]

Doesn’t make any difference from the deer’s point of view [/quote]

It does from a human point of view.

Killing and murder isn't the same thing.[/quote]

You’re splitting hairs. Killing and murder is indeed the same thing. If someone dies of a heart attack, we do not say they were killed.

The word Killed implies murder.

It seems what you’re trying to say is sometimes murder is justifiable perhaps for self defense or hunting and that’s why we have the gun laws that we have but there’s a difference between murdering someone with an Ak47 and Swiss cheesing someone with an AR15 assault rifle. Assault rifles are especially brutal-weapons of war. In fact, they’re perhaps too cruel even for that. In an ideal world, assault rifles wouldn’t exist at all. It’s also insane when these random nutjobs are armed to the teeth more than the police. How are officers supposed to stop a one man army? [/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics