Originally Posted by extralife
guns are not crucial to anything. you don't hunt for sustenance, you go buy your food at wal mart and then dream about hunting for sustenance. you don't protect your neighbors from
black people violent sociopaths, you dream about the possibility of protecting your neighbors from violent sociopaths, so that you can then pretend you are a hero. there is no independence here. there is only fantasy. the gun represents an extension of the way you see yourself. find a new representation, because the reality of this fantasy is that people who actually do think about shooting living things in terms of reality are aided by your narcissism.
your post above is a pretty good one. where it doesn't veer into apology for a certain lifestyle, I think you are right. but if your argument is that guns deter from violent aggression, you will have to ask yourself, and genuinely believe the answer, whether or not the presence of a gun on the person of a victim or possible victim has ever saved as many lives as were just lost today, never mind all other days. we hear stories about violent people shooting up public places twice a year. have you ever heard a story about a violent person attempting to shoot up a public place, only he was stopped by your average fantasy suburbanite packing heat? and do you truly believe that the people vehemently against gun regulation are against it because they truly believe that guns are a net good? or do they just want to have a gun because guns are ****ing cool?
It's true, I harbor an especial loathing for hunting. It has more to do with subjecting myself to the elements and the fact I hate killing stuff needlessly than guns, tho. I think you inject a little too much bias into the psychology of why someone would want to own a gun. Self-preservation and an evolutionary impulse to ensure my genes propagate into the future seem the most obvious. I used to be staunchly anti-gun, ascribing similar caricatures as the one you described above to gun owners. "Who would want one? It's their little misguided fantasy," I thought. One night while visiting my aunt and uncle in North Carolina there was a break-in. I was posted up on the guest couch and about crapped my pants when I realized I wasn't alone. The dude vamoosed but after that I could totally see why someone would like to maintain a firearm. If you do a little digging, I also think you'd be surprised at the number of sane, sensible people who own one. Sometimes violent force only responds to violent force. We could take this macro and look at policies of appeasement and saber-rattling on the international scene, today and throughout history.
Would you admit that if you were to try to imagine yourself as a psychotic killer, the allure of a defenseless public arena (like a gun-free school zone) might be a prime target? I'm truly not angling for anything with a Q like that, because I really wanna know. If I wanna kill as many people as possible, my odds of surviving long enough to shed real blood would plummet if I was under the impression every person I attempted to kill was able to meet me with an equally lethal force? In fact, mass shootings might decrease
as I would be outnumbered and outgunned at the outset. I imagine it very difficult, if not impossible, to prove the deterrence of these types of sadistic shenanigans
that might result from an armed society, but surely you can see the weight behind the theory? Pussies like the shooter today are drawn to weakness, even if that weakness happens to be ****ing elementary school students.