• theodewere@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    10
    ·
    edit-2
    8 months ago

    yeah, because guns are stupid and never help anyone with anything, except in making unstable people worse… only morons cling to guns for safety… guns are for the weak and fearful…

    • Madison420@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      8 months ago

      Or you can just think they’re cool like a car. Saying something is too dangerous to own is fucking stupid, we sell dynamite commercially and anfo by the ton. Bombings just aren’t common because they’re are reasonable licensing and registration requirements.

      • osarusan@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        8 months ago

        Saying something is too dangerous to own is fucking stupid

        they’re are reasonable licensing and registration requirements.

        Don’t you think the reason there are licensing and registration requirements for dynamite is because it’s too dangerous to own?

        • Madison420@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          8 months ago

          It’s clearly not too dangerous to own, it’s dangerous enough to license… That was my point.

            • Madison420@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              7 months ago

              Purchase or possess, yes… You’re taking a real slow route to a very obvious point.

              Register, license and own whatever the fuck you want.

            • Mossy Feathers (They/Them)@pawb.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              7 months ago

              I’m trying to figure out your logic here. You seem to be trying to defend an undefendable position. Cars, afaik, typically require a license to actually own one, yet we don’t consider them too dangerous for someone to own. Are they too dangerous for an unlicensed individual to own? Yeah, but most people can get a license for one.

              On the other hand, anyone can own a sword or a crossbow, or (afaik) build a maser out of a couple microwaves if they want to (or until recently, build and own a flamethrower), so those must be perfectly safe to own. I can pull the electron guns out of old CRTs and build a device pretty much guaranteed to cause melanoma in anyone I point it at. I’m sure the people who end up with skin cancer would be happy to know that the hacked-together cancer-beam I created is perfectly safe because it doesn’t require a license to own.

              So I’m trying to figure out what your point is. You seem to be trying to say that if something is restricted, then it is “too dangerous to own” but that’s obviously not true. Yet for some reason, you’re trying to cling to this argument.

              • osarusan@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                7 months ago

                Are they too dangerous for an unlicensed individual to own? Yeah

                Congratulations. You figured out my point in your first paragraph.