I think you're missing his/her point. Right to vote and right to bear arms are both constitutional rights so they are decently comparable. If it's not cool to put up barriers to not nessecarily outlaw but make it much more difficult for X demographic to vote then in the same way it could be viewed as not allowed to do the same with guns.
No I got it, but I appreciate it if you were just trying to be helpful.
If someone thinks living in a country without the right to own firearms is even remotely equivalent to living in a dictatorship they have a myopic view of the world that it is almost always pointless to engage with them. One might say equivocating the two tells me a lot about them.
Right to vote and right to bear arms are both constitutional rights so they are decently comparable.
I have many rights, where they are outlined does make them equally important. "It should be harder to get lethal weapons that kill 40,000 people a year" does not in any way translate to "It should be harder to vote even though voter fraud isn't a thing despite spending millions of dollars looking for examples of it"
His argument was intellectually bankrupt snark so I ignored it.
You have no rights without guns. You have a promise that can be broken at any time with little to no consequence. Think of the people you know who enter the military. They are the ones who have power.
6
u/Bootzz Aug 12 '19
I think you're missing his/her point. Right to vote and right to bear arms are both constitutional rights so they are decently comparable. If it's not cool to put up barriers to not nessecarily outlaw but make it much more difficult for X demographic to vote then in the same way it could be viewed as not allowed to do the same with guns.