Five Classic Pieces Of False Logic The Right Uses In Order To Promote Gun Culture. (politics)

submitted ago by donarty

1) Guns are a form of protection.

Shields, armour and helmets protect you. Guns shoot toxic pieces of lead into other people.

2) Guns are a form of self-defence.

They can be, sure. However, statistically speaking, more guns are used in crimes than are used in self-defence.

A study of gun use in the 1990s, by David Hemenway at the Harvard Injury Control Research Center, found that criminal use of guns is far more common than self-defense use of guns.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_violence_in_the_United_States

Obviously, potential criminals are going to purchase guns if they are legal. Therefore, you make a useless trade: increased personal protection for increased need for it. The only logical outcome of that trade is more people will die.

3) I don't trust the government.

If the government wants to get you, then your Dirty Harry handgun is not going to stop them. End of story.

4) A 100 lb woman shouldn't have to struggle with a 300 lb rapist.

But you can't arm the victim without simultaneously arming the rapist. So, instead of a rape occurring, which is consequently then investigated by the people whose job it is to investigate rapes, you have a bloodbath. Maybe the rapist gets killed, maybe the victim gets killed, maybe they both get killed, or maybe innocent bystanders get killed.

There are alternative ways to deal with rapists which are final, much safer, and do not end in loss of life.

5) Guns don't kill people. People kill people.

Then it is a stupid idea to give them guns then, isn't it? Unless you are trying to make fucking sure.

Any thoughts?

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

18934732897 ago

Guns shoot toxic pieces of lead into other people.

Therefore they are a strong deterrent which is a form of protection and is suitable for self-defense. Unfortunately no other non-lethal alternatives have the same 'stopping power'.

If the government wants to get you, then your Dirty Harry handgun is not going to stop them. End of story.

If it becomes known that the government abuses people, your revolution is going to work a lot better if it's an armed revolution

Also when your government let in 30000 Muslim invaders in your country, you want a gun.

But you can't arm the victim without simultaneously arming the rapist Guns don't kill people. People kill people. Then it is a stupid idea to give them guns.

Exactly and no. There has been numerous attempt a debunking the relevance of a 'mutually assured destruction' as a deterrent for gun violence and they all rely on one of the requirement of MAD:

Both Actors must be rational and not willing to initiate a kamikaze attack.

So unless you're facing a Muslim or a typical mass-shooter, I think it's a pretty good deterrent.

Those Koreans shop owners were glad they had guns: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1992_Los_Angeles_riots#Korean-Americans_during_the_riots . However before the riots they also killed a black shoplifter.