Depending on how you define the word fear - I would say that it is quite rational to fear a gun.
Racist Trumptard La. cop resigns after disgusting Facebook posts....
- Thread starter Nomad
- Start date
Depending on how you define the word fear - I would say that it is quite rational to fear a gun.
A gun is an inanimate thing, it can not operate on its own. I fear the people who operate the gun, but if you want to fear the gun, you may.
Let me put it to you this way then:
Who would you tend to fear more? An unarmed person or a person armed with a gun?
It depends
Alright. Then let me ask it in such a way that leaves no ambiguity.
Who would you fear more? The same exact person in the same exact situation without a gun or the same exact person in the same exact situation with a gun?
That also depends, the thing to fear is the person and their intentions, a person meaning to do harm can do it with or without a gun.Alright. Then let me ask it in such a way that leaves no ambiguity.
Who would you fear more? The same exact person in the same exactly situation without a gun or the same exact person in the same exact situation with a gun?
Yes, but a person meaning you harm is more dangerous when they are armed with a gun instead of being unarmed. I would have thought that be obvious. But I suppose not.
The point is weapons are something to rationally fear as well - as they can make individuals (and countries for that matter) more dangerous.
The point is that it takes a person to operate the gun in a harmful way to make it dangerous, it can not do so on its own.
And it takes a person to operate a nuclear bomb too. Does that mean it is irrational to fear a nuclear bomb as well?
Specious reasoning alert. Seems Dale has pointed it out. You are creating false alternative or mutual exclusivity. A gun magnifies or multiplies the potential harm, so it is logical to fear the man with the gun more than the man or the gun.
If the issue of this sidebar debate is gun control, by your logic you are opposed to regulation of any inanimate object that may be misused. You can regulate the gun, like any product, without offending you the feelings of the inanimate object.
USFREEDOM911
MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN
Cars and knives can both be deadly weapons as well... and one would be wise to fear them if someone come after you with either.
Pillows I'm not so sure about....though I guess you could smother someone with one. But I would not consider a pillow to be a formidable weapon.
Nomad
Every trumper is a N4T.
No she didn't.
She completely side stepped the issue that the cop who posted the vile post was not only a Trump supporter, but very similar in tone and racist attitude to all too many Trump supporters by changing the subject to nonsense like "he got caught" "the system worked" "everyone posts nasty stuff" "maybe everybody should have to quit their jobs" etc, etc,
If you refuse to call that deflection what it is, you're as big of an ass as she is.
It's not about vulgarity by private citizens on a message board.
It's about a cop whose job it is to project an image of fairness and impartiality who instead, posted a vile, racist message for everyone to see and knowing who he is and what his position WAS.
You're an obvious dumbfuck.
Leave me alone and quit wasting my time.
USFREEDOM911
MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN
Cars and knives can both be deadly weapons as well... and one would be wise to fear them if someone come after you with either.
Pillows I'm not so sure about....though I guess you could smother someone with one. But I would not consider a pillow to be a formidable weapon.
But you're "scenario's" never included someone "coming after you".
Why is that??