H9mestuck Clan Thread: Check y9ur Privilege

Magic missile, obviously.

 

The same way every country without this ability to have personal guns does. The same way it would have been done before guns. I'll take my home for example. A big landowner employs multiple other landless people in the area, and gets them to stay around.
I've sat with a bloody fucking sling, and spent an entire night in my grandfather's farm. And trust me, we have a lot more animals who'd kill you or the crops than America.

 

So, if a criminal comes into your house in the middle of the night where your family sleeps with a gun, you think just learning personal defense will do you well?

 

Yes, make owning the land complicated for no reason when single rifle could scare off a pack of anything with a single shot. Yeah, I completely disagree with that.

 

It did my father well.
It did multiple people I know who live in shady neighbourhoods well.

If you claim that guns are the only thing that can protect you, g-fucking-g Americans.

At what cost though? A lot of lives.

 

I know a boy who's father was murdered in the middle of the night because he was unarmed and tried to stop someone from robbing his house.

 

Cost? What cost? How does a farmer protecting their assets cost lives?

 

You rang?

(Actually, Wox and Crimms rang. But shhh.)

 

because for a farmer to protect his assets it requires it to be legal to own the weapon
and if you can own the weapon you can use it to kill.

 

Okay then.

What about those who don't die, though? What's the statistics?

You make weapons available to farmers, you make it available to the public.
While the gun-stores check for psych and all, what happens when someone snaps after he's gotten the gun? Or when someone does rob him, in the better way which is sneaking in and grabbing everything? Or when he's given an offer for money he desperately needs for the gun, without taxing and registration?
Its gets into the hands of a criminal.

Said criminal robs house.

Welcome to the circle. Guns were wanted to protect home from armed robbers. Robbers acquired guns because guns became available. GG.

Of course, I'm damn sure America will never rid its public's hands of guns. It would now be a bad idea. Too late. Gun control = best for them, but people are still gonna find ways.

 

The statistics are that if there was a gun in the house, maybe my friend wouldn't have to live without a father for the rest of his life.

 

@Alucard I[DOUBLEPOST=1409798009][/DOUBLEPOST]

I don't see any proof of this.
If there hadn't been guns for erryone who can in the first place, then your friend wouldn't have to live without a father.
I can say that too.

 

So lets ban all weapons, wait, then you would have to ban everything including our own fists because anything can be used as a weapon.

If guns never existed, people wouldn't have magically stopped killing each other just because someone banned swords/spears/bows/whatever. People will always have access to weapons, no matter what anyone does (well just short of cutting everyone's hands and feet off).

 

Do I look like a fucking idiot


I said, if there hadn't been guns for the public, then the likelyhood of the gun getting into criminal hands would have been far smaller, and therefore, it was very likely that his friend would not have had to go through such a terrible fate


I am not an idiot.

 

Then he just would have used a knife or his bare hands, just because a robber doesn't have access to a gun doesn't mean he isn't going to rob someone. People rob stores with nothing but their fists, in fact that just happened a month ago and it made national headlines because the cop murdered him. The guy walked into a store, beat the shit out of the clerk, grabbed what he wanted, beat the clerk one more times cause why not, then left, and it was all caught on camera.

 

GJ.
Okay, you know what, its 10 PM, and I'm not going to continue this argument because I'm pretty damn sure you'll just go on and on and on and on.
I'm convinced I'm on the right side, you're convinced you're on the right side.
Total waste of time, let the Congress handle it.

However, I don't see how having guns available to the public has helped America in the long run. Britain's doing much better than America, crime wise, and the police don't have to shoot someone as much because the person is armed and dangerous.

 

I do believe I owe you a sincere apology, and myself a swift kick in the butt.
Sorry mang

 

I would still maintain a criminal without a gun is much less dangerous than a criminal with one. Also, while it's presumptuous at best that the removal of firearms would stop crime, I posit that a sizeable portion of criminals only committed a given crime *because* they had access to a gun.

 

This is correct. Also notice I never said it would stop crime. It just means the success rate would go down.

Crime is, unfortunately, a part of life now, and for another couple of decades, probably.