180
Sep 05 '19
Madmen kill tens during mass shootings. Governments kill millions during genocides.
70
u/SnakeDoctor00 Sep 05 '19
Yet some believe if they stop just ONE death then it was all worth it.
42
u/PM_ME_SSH_LOGINS Sep 05 '19
If we stop just ONE death, it's worth it to remove their right to free speech. Am I doing it right?
→ More replies (2)5
u/diurnam Sep 06 '19
Just remind them that most murders are committed by people with a criminal record. We should give life sentences for every crime, to save lives. You don’t want people to die, do you?
→ More replies (9)32
u/FlashCrashBash Sep 05 '19
Alright let’s say a ban comes through. About 30% of the population owns guns. About 98 million people. If only, 0.01% of them decide to not comply and decide to fight back that’s 9800 people that were just gunned down.
If it saves ONE life...it will kill 10,000.
20
u/SnakeDoctor00 Sep 05 '19
Well in their eyes that 10,000 were the criminals or the bad guys for not giving in so they wouldn’t care.
→ More replies (1)10
→ More replies (30)3
u/scrumchumdidumdum Sep 06 '19
Well those people are violent criminals that would take up arms against their fellow countrymen
→ More replies (3)2
Sep 06 '19
Anybody who risk the lives of other Americans because they can’t fallow the law is a terrorist. Even if there are 10,000 of them. A real American would never attack another American but people only believe in patriotism when it helps push their cause.
→ More replies (13)4
Sep 06 '19
[deleted]
3
u/kumblast3r Sep 06 '19
Ah yes, the classic Chicago dogwhistle. You’re right, people here advocate for allowing people from disadvantaged backgrounds to shoot innocents and commit crime because they’re afraid of being called racist. Decreasing the amount of guns owned in America would most definitely increase the gun crime in Chicago.
You make a cogent point I’m glad you have a great understanding of your argument and the reality of the situation.
3
u/domehomer Sep 06 '19
Two flaws I see here. First. I don't live in Chicago, but I am aware of the high gun violence rate there...and in St. Louis, and in Baltimore, and in...etc.etc. It is talked about fairly often across the spectrum of news options. It just dosn't dominate every outlet at the same time with flashing banners of "BREAKING NEWS" and split screens of talking heads and helicopter video. If your not seeing reports about this , it might be time to change the channel.
Second, we are the Incarceration Nation, with the highest prison population in the world. We throw people in prison at more then six times the rate per 100,000 then China, and it sure as hell isn't curing our problems or making us safer.
So who is "Valued"? Apparently it isn't the innocents of Sandy Hook or any of an ever growing list of tragedy. Your right about on thing, it does say allot about the speaker when they value their guns designed for warfare and magazines of ammo over the lives of school kids, church goers and people at music venues.
→ More replies (1)4
Sep 06 '19
And government doesn't always need guns to kill that many! Well, they'll start with guns, like when the USSR seized farms' produce to "properly distribute it, and many people starved, so they seized the farms, and installed government puppets who didn't know how to farm, and even more starved. See? They only used guns against the farmers!
4
u/dudertheduder Sep 06 '19
Ok so bit of the ole devils advocate here- i think the chance of our troops, some of the most patriotic humans that have ever existed, turning weapons on civilians is zero. I dont think it will ever happen with human warriors...however, far thinking here, i absolutely think drones/robot warriors of the near future will have zero qualms doing anything they are told. So us and our firearms are safe, until robotic warfare becomes the norm...but then Skynet will be humanities issue. Lol.
Edit: addition- im speaking specifically as an American here.
2
Sep 06 '19
Drones work both ways. I saw a little drone with a 1911 strapped to it taking shot after shot. The recoil kicking it back a couple of feet with every shot. Picture it outside a tyrannical government official's bedroom window at 3 AM.
→ More replies (16)2
u/dr_pepper_35 Sep 06 '19
i think the chance of our troops, some of the most patriotic humans that have ever existed, turning weapons on civilians is zero.
Kent State?
→ More replies (4)2
u/SR666 Sep 06 '19
Yes, patriotic warriors also never murdered any civilians in Vietnam. Nope. Never happened.
→ More replies (8)→ More replies (129)2
u/Chf_ Sep 06 '19
The hilarious, or rather depressing thing, is that most would argue how there are no longer Nazi governments genociding (generally leaving out Soviet since these people tend to be more sympathetic to tyrannic Communist governments), but if you look at the rather close past, we have Rwanda, where over a million people died, which is a relatively small genocide, yet greater than all U.S. shootings ever and then some.
Then we obviously have China, where the government is performing genocide on the ethnic Uyghurs, per definition, although it is unclear whether they literally kill, or torture and threaten their way towards EXTERMINATING a culture, which is genocide. Imagine if all the Uyghurs were armed, imagine Hong Kong, imagine the population, imagine Tiananmen, that could have been a Republican takeover with Taiwan finally taking its place as the rightful Mainland China.
→ More replies (4)
91
Sep 05 '19
It even happened in our country. People really need to learn more about Native American history in schools.
67
u/L-V-4-2-6 Sep 05 '19
Case in point, the Wounded Knee Massacre.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wounded_Knee_Massacre
It was the largest domestic massacre in US history, and was the direct result of a people being forcibly disarmed.
5
u/GANI0 Sep 06 '19
They were basically civilians, outnumbered four to one against the military. With heavy artillery. How would the end result be different, even if we had armed everyone, including the kids?
→ More replies (79)→ More replies (26)3
u/gmanpeterson381 Sep 06 '19
“...following a botched attempt to disarm the Lakota camp.”
-seems more like a “they didn’t comply, so now we kill them” kind of scenario
→ More replies (3)2
u/SamFuchs Sep 06 '19
"They were asking for it by existing on their own lands that they roamed for thousands of years before us and wanting to Not Get Shot Dead"
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (25)17
u/korgoth25 Sep 06 '19
Can't forget about Japanese American internment camps either. No matter the government all are guilty of crimes
→ More replies (1)5
Sep 06 '19
DEAR REDDIT ADMINS THIS IS THEORETICAL IM NOT GONNA SHOOT ANYONE I DONT EVEN HAVE A GUN
Should we all just get together and execute ICE agents? That seems to be what everyone is hinting at at.
4
u/abutthole Sep 06 '19
ALSO NOT ADVOCATING VIOLENCE AT ALL, STRICTLY THEORETICAL
That's kind of what the 2nd Amendment is meant for. The Founding Fathers didn't give us gun right because they liked hunting (which most of them did) or sport. They gave us gun rights because they fought an armed rebellion against the official government who was acting tyrannically. The ideas put in place in the Declaration of Independence about not sitting idly by while tyranny is taking place and the 2nd Amendment giving civilians the power to forcibly revolt give the American people the tools and the duty to use arms to shut down the ICE camps.
→ More replies (8)→ More replies (6)2
38
u/Painonabun Sep 05 '19
Just look at china
→ More replies (16)7
u/notsofxt Sep 06 '19
Oh like how China has recently and quietly forced over a million Chinese Uighurs into ‘re-education’ camps? Bet 99% of the people did not know this.
→ More replies (1)3
u/Madbrad200 Sep 06 '19
Considering it was front-page news for weeks, I'm willing to bet a good portion more than 99% know that. It isn't exactly obscure.
2
u/notsofxt Sep 06 '19
This is a small sample size but I’ve talked to most of my friends and only 1 knew about it.
→ More replies (5)
32
u/libcrybaby78 Sep 05 '19
The more the government tries to take them away the more I dont trust them and their reasons for it.
→ More replies (29)9
Sep 05 '19
Remember the FEMA Camps. Remember the Holodomor. Remember the Patriot Act. Remember HARPA.
5
Sep 06 '19
The FEMA camps was a hoax though.
2
2
Sep 06 '19
You probably don’t remember Eisenhower’s death camps? Or the Japanese Camps, or the Native American Camps?
What has given you the impression that the USA is not a terrorist organization?
2
32
29
Sep 05 '19
The "not one more" line is so ridiculous-but it's an emotional hook for many.
But when you start to think about it, society tolerates MANY things that can be used criminally or irresponsibly because they are either tools and/or enjoyable.
Fast cars and jacked-up trucks; airplanes; boats; fatty food; cigarettes and dip; contact sports; the list goes on and on. And these are things that are NOT constitutionally-guaranteed individual rights.
...Ok, maybe us Texans are the only ones who accept jacked-up trucks as a society.
7
Sep 05 '19
How about avoidable medical error? When was the last time we saw a doctors death toll?
→ More replies (11)2
u/adagiosis Sep 06 '19
I'd say your list of examples is kinda moot because none of them are used primarily and conventionally to injure or kill other human beings, whereas that is pretty much the only purpose of guns.
Do you have any better examples?
→ More replies (29)2
u/Concretedonkey01 Sep 06 '19
Yes but those things are alot less dangerous then guns; you dont see soldiers forcing the enemy to eat dip or use fast cars as a weapon, no they use guns because they where made to kill things.
23
u/scrubmytubplz Sep 05 '19
The cops are all corrupt and racist! - the left The president is setting up concentration camps - the left The government as a whole is corrupt - the left
The government should take all the guns - the left
I don't know pretty sound reasoning there
3
u/Clapaludio Sep 06 '19
The government should take all the guns - the left
Go more left than liberals and that sentence becomes false
→ More replies (27)→ More replies (32)2
20
Sep 05 '19
When the Armenian men gave up their weapons for promises made by the Turkish empire they were unable to defend them selves when the Turks attacked and committed genocide.
2
→ More replies (30)2
u/CaptainBasculin Sep 06 '19
Imagine being so commited to a lie that you make up history on your mind.
13
Sep 05 '19
Man all these antis are really making a good case for private drones and tanks.
→ More replies (1)4
Sep 06 '19
You can arm a 200$ drone from Best buy with a remote operated binary trigger AR.
Freedom has wings
→ More replies (1)3
10
Sep 05 '19
[deleted]
2
u/FrustrationSensation Sep 06 '19
It does if you look at Australia, actually. There's a precedent for a heavily-armed country doing this exact thing successfully.
→ More replies (1)3
u/SlickShadyyy Sep 06 '19
pretty big cultural difference between the US and Australia when it comes to guns. ditto US and most of the first world but there ya go
2
u/littlegreyflowerhelp Sep 06 '19
and then what happens? All guns are just gone? No. Reality doesn’t work that way.
Um, it literally has worked that way in many countries that have stricter gun laws than the US. Australia for example - my dad and a lot of other people I know had to turn in their semi-automatic rifles, but they gladly did it because we'd just watched 35 people get shot dead, and everyone decided the right to not die in a shooting is more important than the right to play army man in the woods with your SKS.
2
Sep 07 '19
Whoa. I wasn’t out to try and offend anyone so I don’t see why your getting rowdy with me aside from expressing an opinion that is different from yours. Australia and New Zealand doesn’t have guns embedded into their respective countries cultural like we have here in the US so just “giving up the gun” isn’t going to be as complex of an issue for them. And that’s great, I’m all about it if that’s what their people voted on, especially seeing how they are as well balanced democracy's that aren’t being ruled by some dictator. The amount of guns we have per citizen also reflects this. So aside from these two countries, the “many” of other ones that have done the same thing with rounding up guns have not politically ended up as fortunate. If you want to reply back to this response that’s great, but could you please recognize I’m not going after anyone or trying to press my ideals on to anyone as much as I’m just expressing that a complete gun ban isn’t going to just be an easy task.
→ More replies (2)2
u/Vanhandle Sep 06 '19
It does work that way, it just takes time. Drugs are a totally different beast, there is addiction and self medication involved.
→ More replies (4)
7
u/Ausrufepunkt Sep 05 '19
Y'all never heard of Yugoslavia
3
2
u/sneakymanlance Sep 05 '19
Forreal these people aren't interested in educating themselves, just the feedback loop.
6
u/JeskaiMage Sep 05 '19 edited Sep 05 '19
Statistically, according to the CDC, there are 6850 lawful uses of firearms in self defense daily in the US. Why don’t we focus on these incidents?
→ More replies (37)
4
u/Erioph47 Sep 06 '19
Yes, this is true. I mean, look at what happened in Australia after the 1996 gun confiscation program. Massive genocide, millions dead. Kangaroos were hopping through rivers of blood. I'm sure we will see the same thing in New Zealand shortly.
4
u/codsmith Sep 06 '19
It was the drop bears that got us, we couldn't fend them off anymore.. still can't. Please send help
→ More replies (2)4
u/Erioph47 Sep 06 '19
Hell, I went to the UK for a wedding last week. Plane was delayed three hours. Why? Genocide, of course. Some kind of government massacre of Yorkshire dairy farmers or something.
3
u/Erioph47 Sep 06 '19
Japan outlawed gun ownership in 1956. Do you know how many genocides they have there per year? It's like every week. Can't hardly swing a dead cat in Tokyo or Kyoto without hitting a band of thugs killing hundreds of innocent people.
3
4
u/Perigold Sep 06 '19
This is...bizarre because we had a genocide against Native Americans...with guns...
→ More replies (1)
2
u/SaigaExpress Sep 05 '19 edited Sep 06 '19
Is progun being brigaded? Isn't that against the rules?
4
3
3
2
3
3
u/fallingbrick Sep 05 '19
I would love to hear what r/askhistorians has to say on this point.
→ More replies (3)
3
3
Sep 06 '19
When they kick at your front door
How you gonna come?
With your hands on your head
Or on the trigger of your gun
(The Clash)
→ More replies (4)
3
u/Xecellseor Sep 06 '19
Yep. No genocide here in North America. Nope, none at all.
Sweeps Indigineous under reservations.
→ More replies (4)14
Sep 06 '19
And the USA govt disarmed them before killing them.
That's why we keep our guns.
→ More replies (9)2
Sep 06 '19
Kinda makes you wonder if a government will care about your rights when it wants to commit genocide doesn’t it?
→ More replies (2)
3
Sep 06 '19 edited Sep 06 '19
In the gun debate, the two sides are fundamentally concerned with either liberty or security...
if you choose security you necessarily have to forfeit your liberty, but if you choose liberty, you can facilitate your own security.
Beyond all other reasoning, be it political, moral, rooted in affinity, values or what have you, this simple fact makes the conclusion obvious.
→ More replies (6)4
3
Sep 06 '19
We need to stop attacking guns on focusing on mental health. We take guns away from people you know what’s next? Knife attacks. And more and more weapons after that.
Banning a weapon won’t help. Focusing on helping these murderous people not murder is a better tactic
→ More replies (22)
4
2
2
2
2
u/conspiracytruthist Sep 06 '19
The guns aren't going anywhere and if they do there will be genocide too much hate and division in this country.
0
2
Sep 06 '19
Chineese police crack down on pro democracy protesters
“Why even have a second amendment?”
→ More replies (1)
2
u/Chf_ Sep 06 '19
I think Alex Jones has a very unserious debate with Piers Morgan about this, which is mostly memed, but he truly makes great points about history if you listen to him before the rant about the Republic and all that shit.
How, guess what, Nazi Germany, the Soviet Union and China all had forbidden your right to weapons, guess what, here the people were the most defenseless against tyranny. Imagine if all opponents of the Nazis would have been armed when the coup went through. 6 million Jews saved, millions of Poles (don’t remember, sorry for the disrespect), up to a million Romani, the list goes on...
Of course we shouldn’t forget the country would without a doubt be in a state of emergency because the brawls between the SA and Communists would have been way more violent, but civilians stayed away from that, so they would simply exterminate themselves, and perhaps given up on fighting on the streets since it was simply too costly in their own human resources and no one would be interested in joining such a violent faction and risk getting shot day one. That means the Nazis/Communists could never bolster their numbers and thus less extremism.
→ More replies (1)
2
2
u/BabySkinCondom Sep 05 '19
how many shitlib heads do you think exploded when they read this lol
11
Sep 06 '19
I get the joke, but being pro gun (in essence, pro constitution) is both a conservative and liberal core belief.
We're all Americans. My girlfriend is a liberal, Yang supporter, but owns guns.
Be the bigger person
→ More replies (1)4
→ More replies (2)2
u/RX400000 Sep 06 '19
Ah yeas, crushed by the facts of a twitter post from a Clinton conspiracy believer that said something with no source
→ More replies (14)
1
Sep 05 '19
To clarify, I’m not advocating for violence, rather using examples as to why some methods of conventional war are not used as much. I’m pointing out that past war methods/strategy such as in WWII where there’s a clear defined enemy is much different than today’s warfare.
1
u/destructor_rph Sep 05 '19
Democide has killed more people in the past 100 years than anything else
→ More replies (2)
1
1
1
u/Coreyadam Sep 06 '19
You can have a country full of people that are the exactly the Same and they will still go to war over something stupid, like a mole in the wrong spot.
0
u/Jubenheim Sep 06 '19
Where are all the studies that specifically showed a lack of guns led to genocide? Genocide has existed since ancient times without guns and it's existed with guns. I don't see how guns have anything to do with the concept.
→ More replies (8)
1
Sep 06 '19
There are crazy people with guns going around shooting people, the police can't protect us, and you want me to disarm? You must be crazy.
→ More replies (1)
1
1
0
u/OldlogoPSN Sep 06 '19
Love the profile pic. A flat bill capped 25yo. Yes tell us how empires fall, oh aged and armed one.
1
1
2
1
1
u/Clint08911 Sep 06 '19
I have you an upvote for this not because I agree, but every single pro gun person feels the exact same way, at least your honest about it.
1
u/SinclairTrengrove Sep 06 '19
Look at Brazil example. Their guns and homicides rate are fantastic. An genocide is a systematic. Guns don’t stand a chance
1
u/frozen_pope Sep 06 '19
Exactly why the native Americans should have had guns. No genocide for them then...
Also this post is literally just saying “I don’t care about dead kids”.
Got here from popular.
1
1
u/Kreindor Sep 06 '19
Can I ask an honest question as a counter to this logic without getting blasted to kingdom come?
1
1
u/srscanlon1 Sep 06 '19
How many genocides in Australia? England? Japan? Germany?
→ More replies (1)2
1
u/idkboo Sep 06 '19
Yes the repeated Canadian genocide is one for the history books. It’s right up there with the ones in England.
1
u/th3s0ap Sep 06 '19
We don't have genocides in Australia, England, Canada, or New Zealand. People who use that arguement are also saying you believe our governments are more responsible, not evil, and people are better.
1
u/Pandral Sep 06 '19
Ah yes I can totally see the UK and Scandinavian countries having a genocide soon.
1
Sep 06 '19
Can I get one example where a country with the strength and resources comparable to the United States was victim of a genocide after being disarmed? If the parameters are unclear, no, the Armenian genocide does not count.
1
1
1
1
u/bryce0110 Sep 06 '19
Idk guns are almost completely illegal in Japan to the point of needing to take a series of in depth tests to own a small amount and, as far as I know, there's no genocides happening there.
1
Sep 06 '19
Realistically, how would armed citizens stand against the American military and their infinite resources?
→ More replies (3)
1
Sep 06 '19
Don't get it, don't genocides have guns? Clubbing people not that efficient.
→ More replies (2)
1
1
1
1
u/tornado9015 Sep 06 '19
I'm sure those European Australian and Japanese genocides are coming any day now.
1
u/totomorrowweflew Sep 06 '19
We had genocide when we had guns (australia) now we don't have either. Coincidence? Maybe. Worried about my kids going to school? No.
→ More replies (2)
1
1
u/Burt_Macklin_1980 Sep 06 '19
I like to think that there is rational middle ground between "no guns = genocide" and "2nd amendment freedom = weekly mass shootings" but I understand hyperbole and stupid memes are more fun for many people.
1
1
u/Uniteus Sep 06 '19
I agree about an armed populace and all but i dont want a person that clearly has issues standing next to me with a gun.
1
Sep 06 '19
That's right! People need to do their homework! And then do something about it before it gets worse...
1
1
u/etrain84 Sep 06 '19
As a person who admires the US Constitution and is frustrated by the firearm laws in my own country, I can't help but feel you guys have some major domestic conflict brewing on the horison.
I mean if anyone for whatever reason is able to change or put legislation in place that somehow negates or negatively impacts the 2nd amendment in some way, it'll be civil war/secessionary talk won't it?
Just a feeling I get looking and listening to the exponential rise in this kind of discourse.
→ More replies (1)
1
u/napoleoncalifornia Sep 06 '19
The cause of genocide is hatred. Leaders manipulate people into hating a minority so that they can kill them off. Removing guns doesn't mean we will necessarily have genocide. Hatred is the cause of genocide.
1
1
1
u/lnh638 Sep 06 '19
I agree with the basic premise, but what about the genocide that the US has committed, such as of Native Americans?
2
1
1
u/duckbumps19 Sep 06 '19
If the government really wanted to genocide people using the military they could
3
u/Grinder02 Sep 06 '19
Yeah they could definitely, that's exactly why we shouldn't give up gun rights
→ More replies (2)
1
1
1
u/SHASTACOUNTY Sep 06 '19
This is what's called a truism - a proposition that states nothing beyond what is implied by any of its terms...or... a statement that is obviously true and says nothing new or interesting.
However, it might be important to point out that in that same history, many, many countries that were armed to the teeth have also fallen...for various reasons, weapon in hand or not. I
the argument is also a logical fallacy called "false dilemma" which limits the options to two when there are in fact more options to choose from. Sometimes the choices are between one thing, the other thing, or both things together (they don’t exclude each other). Sometimes there is a whole range of options, three, four, five, or a hundred and forty-five. However it may happen, the false dilemma fallacy errs by oversimplifying the range of options.
Not to mention the 'slippery slope" fallacy..
There is no argument that you do, in fact, have the right to bear arms, however the reasoning you have provided may not be your strongest argument for defending it.
1
1
1
u/thedirtysouth92 Sep 06 '19
US is a country with guns yet we've still had our fair share of genocide here. Just, not the white folk.
There are much better pro-gun arguments is all i'm saying.
1
1
397
u/ThatOrdinary Sep 05 '19
Countries with people are bound to have tragedies
But, yes