Anonymous #1 3w

“Lalala I can’t hear you” ahh argument

37

Anonymous #1 3w

good try buddy

27

Anonymous #2 3w

They didn’t make a point 😭. Thing is people break the law, thats the whole point. If someone would kill someone, obviously they don’t care to follow the law. Making guns against the law form someone whod kill someone is like throwing water in the ocean. The only person it actually discourages is the law followers, it de-arms victims.

-8

Anonymous #1 3w

Thing is, Drugs are illegal and people still do them and disperse them, and so abortion pills will be no different, but if guns are completely regulated or illegal, then they literally won’t be manufactured and you will only be able to get the small amount left after they supposedly take them away, off the black market for insanely high prices and most will be swept up. The difference is one’s a drug and the government uses drug bust money to fuel the economy, so they care less,

19

Anonymous #4 3w

Which is why we are still fighting drugs like fentanyl and cocaine and meth, and why the UK and other countries who have stricter gun laws and are successful. Drugs and guns are two different things and so they will be handled in two completely different ways.

24

Anonymous #4 3w

Are you dumb? Guns are extremely easy to make… you could make one right now. Guns will also always be made, no matter what. I’d say guns would be more accessible than the individual drug come restrictive laws.

-5

Anonymous #4 3w

Bro… reread that

2

Anonymous #3 3w

That actually still is a net benefit… being shot is much deadlier than being stabbed. And you can’t do a mass stabbing dawg

2

Anonymous #6 3w

I should have specified that in the example the two people are stabbed to death, not just wounded. Also you can very much do a mass stabbing, it happens every year all over the world. Though the typical definition of a mass shooting is three or more people being involved, so by that criteria mass stabbings happen every day.

0

Anonymous #3 3w

It is much much harder and more unlikely to stab someone to death than shoot them to death. That’s just common sense.

12

Anonymous #6 3w

But that’s just not born out in the data. Places which ban guns don’t have a drastic drop in the number of murders committed. The most frequently cited examples are places like Australia and New Zealand, which experienced exactly the same downtrend in murder after banning guns that they were experiencing before they did.

-1

Anonymous #3 3w

Murder rates in the US are also not correlated with gun ownership. states with high gun ownership have both extremely low murder rates (like New Hampshire.) and extremely high murder rates, like Florida. Places with extremely restrictive laws also have extremely high murder rates, like Chicago Detroit etc. and extremely low rates like San Diego.

-1

Anonymous #6 3w

The United States absolutely has a problem with murders, some parts are as dangerous as a literal war zone. But guns aren’t the casual factor, banning guns wouldn’t suddenly make O block a good place to be, and it wouldn’t make Ervin safer. The most predictive factors of violence are economic hardship, the prevalence of drugs and the prevalence of gangs. None of which would be solved by removing guns from the hands or homes of over a hundred million law abiding people.

-1