Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

LordFluffy t1_iu5rajp wrote

> The gun will be more deadly the vast majority of the time.

"Vast" I think is an overstatement.

And again, this is centering the conversation on one means of violence in the US which I think is myopic.

1

Head-Ad4690 t1_iu5rg0i wrote

Well, I don’t think it’s an overstatement. Again, the people to whom it matters most, the mass-murdering fuckheads, nearly always choose a gun when they can.

3

LordFluffy t1_iu5rqff wrote

> Again, the people to whom it matters most, the mass-murdering fuckheads, nearly always choose a gun when they can.

Mass murder is horrific. It is also the least of the violence in the US.

I think if you put the effort in to helping victims of abuse relocate and become financially independant, just for example, you'd save far more lives than if you melted all the guns in the US to scrap, much less any actually feasible gun control measure.

1

Head-Ad4690 t1_iu5rwtq wrote

Nice deflection.

3

LordFluffy t1_iu5sia1 wrote

No, kind of my whole damn point.

The goal is to save lives, yes? On this we can agree, I hope.

The effort to implement restrictive gun control I think has cost the left more political capitol than it's been worth. I think it's helped the right and also given some very terrible people a symbol (along with the mythologizing of certain weapons).

Furthermore, I didn't pick domestic abuse haphazardly. There's a big correlation between abuse and mass murder. Even in the narrow window of violence we're talking about, I think you'd see better results trying to undercut motive rather than restrict means.

I'm not deflecting. I'm just not putting on blinders to the larger issues at hand.

1

Head-Ad4690 t1_iu5t15b wrote

If that was your whole damned point then you would have led with that. Instead, you talked about individual instances of knife and vehicle violence as if that somehow proved something.

Here are two statements I hope we can both agree on although I won’t be surprised if you find some way to argue:

  1. Guns are, in general, a far superior tool of mass murder than knives or other easily accessible weapons.
  2. Mass murder is not the top priority if your goal is to save lives by whatever means you can.
3

LordFluffy t1_iu5td9y wrote

> Instead, you talked about individual instances of knife and vehicle violence as if that somehow proved something.

Because I was responding to particular statements you made.

> Here are two statements I hope we can both agree on although I won’t be surprised if you find some way to argue

I think any objection I'd have would be nitpicking.

1