• PDFuego@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    2 days ago

    Sorry, you’ve misunderstood, I don’t disagree about any of that. I was talking about your use of car ownership as a comparison to gun ownership. It’s something I see come up a lot in gun rights arguments and it’s always seemed so unreasonable to me because of the difference I mentioned being so vital (perhaps because I live in a country much less… enthusiastic about guns). There’s no reason for us to have that particular discussion and I have zero interest in doing so, I just took issue with your comparison, that’s all.

    • ObjectivityIncarnate@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      I was talking about your use of car ownership as a comparison to gun ownership.

      I understand you wanting to differentiate a weapon from a non-weapon causing the death, but it really doesn’t impact the analogy I don’t think, because in either case, the intended use of X is to use it when justified (e.g. re a gun, for hunting if it’s that kind of gun, for self-defense if a handgun, etc.). Now, if there was zero application for X that was justifiable for a random individual to possess, then I’d be more on board with your point (e.g. an explosive beyond ‘firecracker strength’).

      perhaps because I live in a country much less… enthusiastic about guns

      Well, I live in the US, and I personally abhor guns, but I try (more than most, in my experience, hence my chosen alias) not to let it bias my arguments.

      This is by no means any sort of ‘pro-gun’ argument. It’s just that, since this is a themed community, when I see something that doesn’t follow the theme, if I feel like it at the time, I’ll point it out. That’s really all there was to it, lol.