• 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