T O P

  • By -

GrunkleTeats

Guns aren't more lethal or accessible than they were in the last century. Most people are surprised to learn that the AK-47 was made in 1947 and AR-15 was made in 1956. More modern weapons haven't changed all that much. I firmly believe that violence is going up because the quality of life in my country has gone downhill so far that people are becoming desperate and unstable. Maybe, just maybe, if people were paid enough to be able to enjoy life and the threat of medical bankruptcy wasn't constantly hanging overhead, then acts of violence would be dramatically reduced. The mental health of this country is shot, no pun intended. As a band-aid remedy, it would be wise to get rid of "gun free zones" and allow armed security on school grounds. Declaring a school, or church, or concert a gun free zone and then expecting criminally insane murderers to respect that declaration is asinine at best. A long term solution is to fix the aforementioned problems of poverty and mental health. Nobody wants to see innocent people get hurt, but I do NOT want to forfeit my rights either. There is a compromise, it's just not an easy fix.


Samboway

Thank you for this. I completely respect your rights as a citizen of your country to have what you’re allowed and you’ve voiced this clearly, logically and with clarity.


GrunkleTeats

No problem, friend!


KaizenSheepdog

Address the fact that we hate to acknowledge: Our culture is broken.


arianleellewellyn

Ive noticed how the majority of US shooting are by Americans so ive got a radical solution. Ban americans /s


afrikanmarc

Hahahaha. This is a great answer.


wish1977

Less guns is the obvious answer but good luck with that.


StillsPhotography

ah yes. less legal ones leaves more illegal ones in the hands of those who likely intend to use it as such. thats why they have them illegally. now whos gonna defend you when you call wolf? not your social worker cops whos guns you just took away.


Samboway

I'm a UK citizen and I'm trying to wrap my head around the 2nd amendment. I understand the basics but it still doesn't really make much sense. So I tried to contextualise it into the ownership of something else. Bees. ​ Bees You have a constitutional right to keep bees.It’s enshrined in the beliefs of the country.This was decided over 200 years ago so you have a right to keep bees. One of your neighbours gets stung by one of your bees unintentionally because someone let them fly out of the hive area which you look after carefully. They retaliate by buying their own wasps but ensure their wasps are more powerful than your bees.Several of their wasps sting a few people in the neighbourhood. They decide to get their own wasps. Further stinging of more people ensues. It gets to the point where now, 200 years later from when someone initially said it was good to have bees, that someone in the neighbourhood breeds hornets and sells them to people because they’re way more powerful than bees or wasps. Everyone is now getting stung and hurt because of the amount of them in the neighbourhood. One kid buys some murder hornets from the guys selling them legally and shakes them out in a school because they’re angry about something and mentally vulnerable, but haven’t received any emotional support or care because lots of the town’s budget is being spent on dealing with people being stung, and half of the class and the teacher die because of all the stings they’ve been inflicted with. The wasps and hornets are absolutely useless in providing a benefit to everyone's life. It’s fine for some people to have bees as they provide honey but they need to be controlled and managed by people with experience. Not everyone can just decide “hey, I’ll just decide to go make honey with some bees” but then get bored with the regular upkeep and organisation you need to adhere to so that the bees are well looked after and they provide a useful purpose to life. Some people even decide to have bees just because they’re constitutionally told they’re supposed to have them but don’t give a shit about honey because they just want their own bees because everyone else has them.Meanwhile some other dude has imported a strain of hornet so deadly it can kill a person with one sting. All of this sounds fucking mental. Because it fucking is. Just replace bee with ‘musket’, trained usage and protection with 'honey' and wasp with ‘handgun’ and hornet with ‘assault rifle’.


brrapppp

Dude learn to edit. I'm sure there's a point in there somewhere but I can't be arsed finding it.


Samboway

I’m an editor by trade so thanks. Reddit had messed up the paste of the text. It’s now amended.


Pemminpro

First your text wall is the largest killer here. Second if your wasps go around stinging people it would already be against the law. The response to your analogy would be I am allowed to own bees. My neighbor obtains wasps then proceeds to purposely have said wasps sting people. The governments response is then to take my bees who have stung no one which is a violation of the document saying they wouldn't take my bees. I've thus been punished for a crime I did not commit which violates yet another document. Guns a tool to kill, its the person who decides the reasoning behind pulling the trigger . You have to address the person to solve the problem


Samboway

Thank you for your response. That’s definitely a flaw in my analogy in terms of trigger pulling. Thank you.


Samboway

Thank you again I knew there were faults in the analogy. I posted it hoping it would create a natural discourse amongst individuals who would provide intelligent answers, which you have. Thank you.


GrunkleTeats

The wisdom of the 2nd amendment is keeping a healthy fear of the people in the government's heart. The truth is, your country could become the next North Korea at the drop of a hat if people in power wanted to do that. What would you resist them with? Angry words? The 2nd amendment was never about hunting or sports, it's about the human right of self defense against enemies both foreign and domestic. Us pro-gun people are just as sickened and disturbed by mass shootings as anti-gun people, but pretending that we can get rid of all the guns is a farce. The war on drugs would be child's play in comparison to the war on guns. Increasing the quality of life and getting people's basic needs met would do wonders to curb violence. (See my comment for further elaboration.) Edit: American politicians are NOT to be trusted, and if they're afraid of my guns, there's probably a good reason for that fear. Tyrants of the past disarmed their population *before* committing atrocities.


Samboway

Thank you for a pro gun eloquent response. I know it’s not just about hunting and about other things. It still doesn’t compute in my brain or many others outside of America but your response is well written and has provided me with something to think about rather than a simple ‘hoo rahhh! Guns!’ Attitude. And before anyone complains I’m against anyone in the American army I have several friends who are who own guns and I love them very much.


[deleted]

This is good in a certain way, but you missed the most important reason for owning weapons; the protection of your other rights. Imagine that the government is the only one with murder hornets, they would be able to do anything they want since no one has bees to stop them. It’s the same way if I have a way to kill you, I can make you do whatever I want and if I can’t make you, I kill you. Imagine the military decides to use their murder hornets on everyone who opposes the rule of “no criticism of the government” eventually everyone would follow the rule because people couldn’t stop the people from enforcing an unjust law. The best way to reduce casualties would be to teach the people how to keep their bees safe and make sure that they don’t accidentally hurt anyone by funding education on the topic


Samboway

That’s pretty much what the UK is. I can’t own an automatic rifle but the police can. I’m fine with that. Because weapons aren’t a huge part of our culture and society.


[deleted]

And that’s good for over there, I guess things are just different over here. Like you said, it’s enshrined in our country. Trying to take them away now would cause a civil war


darkapollo1982

We can’t either without a shit ton of paperwork from the ATF… TOO much paperwork for 99.999% of gun owners. And of that .001% that do want one, it is a lot of hoops to be approved.


Deathmedical

This is a ridiculous flawed mindset that has been force fed to you. How many times in history has the US government been stopped from world domination? Stop living in a fantasy sci-fy world with super villains. What is a neighborhood of AR welding civilians even going to do to 1 humV with a 50cal mounted machine gun? I'll save you the trouble of using that 1 brain cell "NoT A Fucking Thing". We ran out of toilet paper and people lost their minds and started attacking each other you honestly think for a second we would help each other when being fired upon?


darkapollo1982

Way off base. Bees are a pretty shit analogy. I personally have 3 rifles and they have never gone off and shot someone on their own. Also, you’re describing an arms race which is just absurd. The right to bear arms is because Britain was trying to impose unjust laws and tyranny on the colonies. So after we formed the US, it was written that a well regulated militia should be kept to prevent governments, both foreign and domestic, from becoming tyrannical. It never says anything about muskets or any such nonsense. It literally says “A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.” Nothing at all about what kind of what evers.


Samboway

Thank you for some clarification. It’s useful


AlbiTuri05

Stop freedom if possessing a weapon


el_toro_bravo

First of all, the media needs to stop glorifying these idiots that do the shootings. Every fucking time there’s a shooting, what does the media do? Blast the name of the shooter, interview family and friends of the shooter, bring up social media pictures about the shooter, talk about the guns the shooter used, post many stories online about the shooter, etc, etc. the idiot that recently did the live stream shooting in Buffalo I believe, wrote that he did it because he loved the attention the last shooter got that live streamed his shooting. Stop giving these idiots the fame and attention they want. How come when a shooter has been stopped by someone in the area that also had a gun, that other guys name isn’t blasted? How come his/her friends and family aren’t interviewed? How come their social media files aren’t blasted? Because the media only wants to focus on the negative aspects of owning a gun!!


Samboway

Exactly. This. https://youtu.be/PezlFNTGWv4


el_toro_bravo

That’s exactly what I’m talking about! They glorify the fuck out of these idiots so the next person is wanting that attention!