• lennybird@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      This is not as clever as you believe it to be.

      I particularly use a car on the daily whose primary purpose is to take me from point-A to point-B. You know, the part where I said Risk-Benefit…?

      Tell me what the primary use of a firearm in my home is on a daily-basis other than being an active risk.

      • yarr@feddit.nl
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        8 months ago

        Tell me what the primary use of a firearm in my home is on a daily-basis other than being an active risk.

        Well, it serves multiple purposes, actually! For starters, it makes a fantastic paperweight when I have too many documents on my desk. Secondly, if I ever run out of popcorn kernels while watching a movie, I can just load some small ones into the gun and shoot them into a frying pan. It also works great as a marshmallow launcher during backyard bonfires - that’ll impress all your friends at your next neighborhood get-together. Oh, and last but not least, you can use it as a walking stick or a selfie stick for those hard-to-reach angles. Clearly, there are several creative ways to utilize a firearm in everyday life.

      • aStonedSanta@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        8
        ·
        8 months ago

        The primary use is to protect you from someone who attempts to cause you harm. It’s only an active risk if not understood how to use and not properly out of reach of those who do not understand. I don’t like guns but I am not sure what you are trying to argue?

        • lennybird@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          8 months ago

          This mindset is like the motorcyclists or automobile drivers who espouse they don’t plan on wrecking because they’re good drivers, lmao.

          Welcome to why we have speed-limits;; sure, some might know how to drive faster, but boy, when do my fellow males ever over-extend their confidence beyond their actual capability…?

          lol anyways, the reality is that statistically the risk to those within the household from mere possession (safety accidents from children, suicide, domestic abuse/homicide, not opting to run, hide, flee, cooperate that are all better alternatives than engaging, statistically, theft of firearm and its use elsewhere) outweighs the safety. Full-stop. From a societal standpoint, that’s kind of a bad ROI.

            • lennybird@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              8 months ago

              … And thus in the words of Jim Jefferies, they’re not exactly too great for protection in the heat-of-the-moment, now are they?

              … And oh how I wish the vast majority of gun-owners were responsible enough to lock them away. Yet time and time again – case in point here in this very article – we see they cannot be trusted with the simple standard of locking away firearms.

              • aStonedSanta@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                8 months ago

                Yeah. I agree with ya tbh. Just trying to play devils advocate to get a conversation going.

                Sadly it’s impossible to argue for guns in good faith. Lol