this post was submitted on 19 Dec 2024
1008 points (93.8% liked)

Comic Strips

12953 readers
2618 users here now

Comic Strips is a community for those who love comic stories.

The rules are simple:

Web of links

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] -3 points 2 days ago (23 children)

Countries that "don't have much gun crime" = countries with acid attacks

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (22 children)

This made me laugh. You sound like Philomena Cunk!

Surely, all that needs to happen is that everyone needs to carry bottles of acid. It will be completely safe in the hands of well-trained acid handlers, and accidents will only happen to people who weren't trained well enough! This means you wouldn't even need to regulate it!

[–] [email protected] -1 points 2 days ago (21 children)

How about you just give them guns so they can shoot the acid attackers. Turns out, you don't need much training with a gun. Point shoot. Very simple. Point shoot. School shooters figure it out just fine.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I don't even know where to start.

There will be fewer acid attacks with guns because everyone will have access to a way more convenient and easy way of harming each other, yes.

So....problem solved?

Which side of the argument are you actually on?

[–] [email protected] -1 points 2 days ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)
  • There are plenty of convenient and easy ways for harming each other outside of guns (France circa 2016). The same goes for suicide. So banning guns doesn't actually make it "harder" for people to harm one another, esp. when you can just drive a truck through a crowd.
  • Gun control doesn't work anyways (Winnenden School Shooting, Jokela School Shooting Finland, 2007, Alphen aan den Rijn Shopping Mall Shooting in Netherlands, 2011, etc. etc.).
  • Guns save more productive civilian lives than the the criminal lives they take, and people like you purposefully ignore this fact. In trying to save a few hundred or maybe thousand lives from gun violence (most of which are violent criminals themselves), you people are willing to deprive millions of innocent hard working people the ability to defend themselves. You know nothing.
  • Even if all of this was false, the ability to resist tyranny is more valuable than the lives lost to gun-crime.

How about instead of low-IQ hamfisted moves such as taking away guns, you people look at policies that would address the root causes of crime like broken families, poverty, mental illness, homelessness, and cultural malaise? You don't. Because you're lazy. And THAT is why you want to get rid of guns. Because you don't care enough about the people to invest some effort in actually solving all the related problems that lead people to use guns in the first place.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

What is the bigger problem? Acid attacks or gun crime?

I help fix patients who have been shot. Don't lecture me about solving problems. I'm part of the Violence Intervention and Prevention team - we provide services and assistance to those injured by firearms. I work in a level 1 trauma center in the orthopedic trauma department.

Go ahead and guess how many of those patients have been shot by a good guy with a gun in the past nine years. Go ahead and guess how many good guys with guns end up being the patient.

Here's a hint. The answer to the first question is fewer than 1.

[–] [email protected] -2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Yawn. Your personal experience is not reflective of broader trends. If you work in healthcare, you really should be smart enough to know this. So I will lecture you, because you clearly need it. Besides, you haven't refuted any of my points, you just resorted to logical fallacies like appeals to authority and anecdotal evidence. Proof that you don't have anything useful to say anymore. Smh.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

Oh I'm smart enough thank you. Just because you've read an online guide to logical fallacies, doesn't make my personal experience irrelevant, it makes it an anecdote. Its written as food for thought (we're talking zero cases out of multiple thousands of orthopedic gun shot wound injuries). I dont have a duty to refute anything. This isn't debate class. If you want to do that, then why dont we roll back to square one when you mentioned acid attacks as if their prevalence is equal to gun crime in America and that guns would solve the problem somehow. A completely ludicrous claim if ever there was one.

Yawn (asshole)

[–] [email protected] -1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I really don't think you are smart enough. lol

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I really don't think you would know

[–] [email protected] -1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

you've given me all the proof I would need lmfao.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

"I know how to think critically" insults and belittles

[–] [email protected] -2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

"I work in health care" Exhibits the intelligence of a ostrich

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

How so? Why don't you have a real argument instead of hurling crap insults, acid man?

[–] [email protected] -1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

reread your stuff. if you can't understand how it proves your own stupidity, then you really are hopelessly lost.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 day ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

You vastly overestimate your own skills in that department, acid man.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

said the man who couldn't refute literally any of my points (and clearly didn't understand most of them in the first place)

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 day ago* (last edited 17 hours ago) (1 children)

I can refute them, but unfortunately you were already being insulting.

The problem of acid attacks is just that. A problem. One that people are actively trying to fix. Nobody thinks acid should not be regulated. Only the weirdest kind of psycho collects different vials of acid based on their ability to stop humans.

The number of acid attack deaths, even in the worst affected countries, are insignificant vs the number of deaths caused by gun crime and gun suicide. Never the less, I still think it's an issue that needs regulation.

I do not think acid should be banned. I do not think guns should be banned. So you can throw away those arguments as far as I'm concerned. In your terms, you knocked down the straw man. I'm bored of arguments revolving around logical fallacies. They make me cringe because they remind me of myself in my 20s. Over 30 years ago now. It doesn't interest me to try to outlogic people.

Anyway, where we we? I believe we've covered a few mistakes with logic, but I'm happy to point out some more...

If there are plenty of other ways for people to hurt other people, and the other ways are so convenient, why are you so worried about not having a gun - simply use the other things to protect your family? Silly idea? Why?

The fact is, guns are used for few useful purposes that don't involve hurting things. Either you're target shooting, doing Robert Deniro impersonations in front of the mirror, or maiming and killing things.

Giving sources of incidences where gun control procedures fail is not helping me believe in your critical thinking skills. Why? Because there isn't just one path to take. There isn't just one way to try and lower the number of injuries and deaths. You don't just give up trying to cure illnesses because one method didn't work.

You tell me I don't know anything. You tell me I don't use logic. You call me "you people" and attack points i haven't made. You have basically not demonstrated any logical thinking skills at all. You haven't made a single valid point.

Meanwhile my days are filled with all kinds of experiences related to gun crime. A baby was shot through because he was being held by the target grandmother. Police obliterating people's limbs because they want the biggest harm possible in their firearms, people still alive with missing faces, amputation both traumatic and because of infections. Kids with one eye missing who were out shopping with their parents 30 minutes ago . Crowds of weeping family members on the street outside the ED. Gang members pushing past security to try and finish off the murder they started. Wounds that you can see through. Threats of gun violence towards me and my coworkers.

All I want is for this to happen less. You don't. By your actions and your stance, you want it to either stay the same or get worse. Not only that, you want it for other countries too.

Approaching mental health issues is a valid path. Nobody argues against that. You have a responsibility to do more.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

you probably didn't even refute my points anyways. just not worth it.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 23 hours ago
load more comments (19 replies)
load more comments (19 replies)
load more comments (19 replies)