Quote:
Originally posted by dave
He used a gun in a wholly inappropriate manner and I paid the price. But it's not the gun's fault - it's his fault.
I sure as shit don't want that to happen again because I couldn't defend myself.
So there's my bias.
|
Sure. But how were you attacked? If you had a concealed firearm yourself, could you have prevented it? You say he used the gun inappropriately - how could 'everyone' having guns have prevented that?
The 'it's not the gun's fault' line is understandable, but perhaps misguided: Without the gun, it wouldn't have happened. He wouldn't have had a way of 'mishandling' anything to half-blind you from Lord knows how far away. (maybe he was standing next to you, I don't know) It's a
lot more difficult (even accidentally) to kill, maim, or blind people without a gun. Sure, it can be a tool for good, but how often is it a tool for evil, even out of sheer negligence?
If everyone had guns, unless everyone had to undergo ridiculously stringent testing beforehand (which we know isn't going to happen), there would be more gun-related accidents, not less. Simply due to sheer numbers. More people would be injured. More people would abuse guns, use them in anger, use them when hit by an attack of anxiety or depression (often undiagnosed), or use them drunk.
More people would become victims. More people would lose their sight, or their lives.
X.
PS: I said what I had to say; going any further wouldn't sway anyone's opinion, and cause disagreement rather than consensus. I'll read, but I'll refrain from posting unless I consider something to be objectively wrong.