this isn't hypothetical, we have examples of this in the real world just look at Vermont, they have no gun laws and that state is a slaughterhouse oh wait...
Alaska is incredibly gun friendly and it's the most violent state in the country. Oh wait... cue Debbie Downer.
There's not much you can do to try to calm down people who are irrationally afraid of inanimate objects. People who are afraid of guns will always be afraid of guns.
I feel like as society we should be progressing away from things that could potentially kill us. Like automating cars. Finding ways to decrease the response time for emergency services. Smart homes that are capable of foiling house robberies. Etc. I feel like guns for everybody is a very temporary bandaid solution to a problem that may not exist in fifty or one hundred years. When it comes to combatting crime.
Ok, let's look at vermont compared to D.C. DC: Highest population density in America - 10k/sq mile Vermont: 67 people per square mile. DC: Highest poverty rate in America Vermont: Lowest poverty rate in America Oh yeah, in Vermont, you can't bring your gun to school. It's against the law.
All of your posts in this thread are really silly or uninformed. This one is a little different because instead of instantly dismissing it, I find myself curious how you think a smart house eliminates the need for self defense? You are pretty safe in your house already, and concealed carry is about defending yourself outside of those safe confines.
If society really is progressing, guns won't be a real danger. They are only really a danger for a primitive society....you know, because they are nothing but inanimate objects. Any society that would fall apart into murder and violence because of the mere presence of things that could potentially be used for violence isn't a very advanced society. Why don't we focus on society actually progressing and stop worrying about inanimate objects?
When open carry proponents mention freedom of speech they give the game away. If one person has a gun and another doesn't, there is no way the second guy has true freedom of speech, particularly about controversial topics... politics, religion, abortion, Fox News... because the other guy can get agitated and kill you in a second. Any sane person will hold their tongue and walk away. This is about freedom of gun carriers to impose their way on everyone else and give them some semblance of power over others. This is a bad, bad law for Texas, education, and college kids. It will wreck lives unnecessarily, but hey, Freedom!
LOL that's absolutely the worst argument I've seen on any topic today. I'm not sure if that's impressive or depressing, but it's certainly noteworthy.
It's not an argument. It's a fact. Sane people aren't going to argue with someone who has a gun. Even if they themselves have a gun. But please, enlighten me as to what makes it the worst.
