• TimeSquirrel@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    I don’t care if you don’t like guns. Arm up, learn to shoot, and protect yourselves out there. One political side has been stockpiling for decades (it’s even part of their culture) while the other side is willingly disarming themselves.

    • GentlemanLoser@ttrpg.network
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Curious how that would help here?

      She got arrested for being the victim. If she shoots her attacker do you think the cops wouldn’t have still arrested her?

      Unless you meant protect ourselves from the cops, but running gun battles with the cops isn’t going to help anyone.

      • TimeSquirrel@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        1 year ago

        The presence of a firearm itself may have been enough to make them think twice. I mean, do you normally try to assault someone who’s visibly carrying?

          • TimeSquirrel@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            Get assaulted, raped, possibly killed? Or deal with the arrest and after math of having defended yourself from such. I know which one I’d choose.

            • SharkEatingBreakfast@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              1 year ago

              I’m sorry, but I hate this argument… because it’s crock.

              Attackers generally do not telegraph their intentions. They often come on suddenly and unexpectedly. I’ve been assaulted before and could not have defended myself even if I wanted to. I was caught too off-guard. Having a gun would not have helped me in any of those situations.

              It’s a “I am very badass!”-solution often from folks that have never been in that vulnerable kind of position before, because if they have, they would know that it cannot be reliably executed.

        • ChunkMcHorkle@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          The presence of a firearm itself may have been enough to make them think twice. I mean, do you normally try to assault someone who’s visibly carrying?

          A gun that can be seen is a gun that can be wrestled away from you, especially if you are physically smaller or weaker than your assailant. It’s also an item of value begging to be stolen the second you’re not completely in command of your surroundings.

          It’s also a good way to get shot pre-emptively by a cop who actually does have adequate gun safety training but no morality to go along with it, simply because he’s a hunter and your open carry visible weapon made you fair game. “I feared for my life” is all he will have to say, and you will just be one more statistic without ever even having drawn it, especially if you are a minority or a member of some other group they don’t like.

          That kind of firearm-as-fashion-deterrent only appeals to LARPers. People who take gun ownership with the absolute seriousness it requires do not open carry casually, nor do they pull out a gun unless they are about to fire it. This is casual, ignorant, deadly irresponsibility and a big part of why we have the firearm problems we do in this country right now.