• stephen01king@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    1 month ago

    A less than lethal weapon would also, presumably, has less of a deterrent than a gun, wouldn’t you agree?

    Also, you’re assuming that every bigot that dare to bash queer people would also want to be a murderer, which is not likely. Attacking from behind is more likely, but the same thing can still happen even if they are not armed.

    With conceal carry, now you have the exact same probability of being bashed by bigots as not being armed, but you now are more likely to be tried for murder or manslaughter, which the exact thing you’re using as argument against open carrying, so that doesn’t make sense.

    • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 month ago

      Not really. Why would you attack someone with a stun gun on their belt? If you’re stupid enough to do that, you’re stupid enough to attack them with a gun on their belt.