• Bongo_Stryker
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    10 months ago

    Whelp, if you can’t convince people to get a vaccination for a virus that killed millions, you won’t convince people that giving up their guns will reduce their chance of getting killed.

    I think a lot of people are convinced that there would be less crime overall if more people had guns and cc permits. But I bet if some wealthy philanthropist set up a foundation to subsidize affordable guns and ammo for low income families and immigrants there would probably be a lot more political will to regulate firearms.

    • MomoTimeToDie@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      10 months ago

      you won’t convince people that giving up their guns will reduce their chance of getting killed.

      Because it won’t. This has been proven time and time again. Reducing guns doesn’t reduce violence.

      • Lookin4GoodArgs@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        10 months ago

        The point of reducing gun availability isn’t to reduce instances of violence, it’s to reduce the carnage after it. The force multiplying effect of a knife is significantly less than most guns.

        If we assume people are violent and dangerous, then we should limit the damage they can do.

        • MomoTimeToDie@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          10 months ago

          If thsr were true, would we not see significantly higher rats of homicide and the like when guns are more prevalent? Or even any notable change whatsoever?

          • PizzaMan@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            10 months ago

            We do see that trend though. Compare the homicide rates of the U.S. with European countries.

            • MomoTimeToDie@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              4
              ·
              10 months ago

              Ahh, yes. Because there’s absolutely zero other differences between countries. If you had a valid point and not just bullshit, countries like Switzerland and Finland would be the murder capitals of Europe and not some of the safest, no?

              • PizzaMan@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                edit-2
                10 months ago

                You’re the one who asked this question:

                If thsr were true, would we not see significantly higher rats of homicide and the like when guns are more prevalent?

                To which the answer is yes, we see significantly high rates of homicide where guns are more prevalent.

                If you had a valid point and not just bullshit, countries like Switzerland and Finland would be the murder capitals of Europe and not some of the safest, no?

                So you’re saying we should move our gun law to be closer in line with those two countries? I agree! Let’s start by instituting Finland’s requirement for a gun license to be able to own a gun.