Earlier quoted context omitted.
> It hands an implicit veto on opinion to the violent. Utterly shameful. Except that isn’t how it has worked in the US at all. Can weapons be used to intimidate and coerce? Of course. But we’re civilized. We have freedoms and we are protected from unlawful force by lawful force. Speech is virtual limitless. Non violent protest has and will continue to be a fruitful avenue of change. Self reliance and individual empow…
My comment is not limited to political discourse. The rates of firearm use in domestic and personal disputes in the US are a disgrace. Half of women killed in domestic disputes are shot. But even then, it only shows those cases where guns were actually used. We can only guess how often the threat of such violence, either explicit or implicit is enough to coerce or intimidate. The attitude that the correct way to fix…
Statements like this remind me how lucky we are to have created such a safe space for people to be born, raised, and live so that they can maintain this view. You’re lucky and hopefully people like you can help us build a better society.
Some of us weren’t so lucky. We experienced violence, we went to war, we have actually seen the chaos and terror that people can cause.
I am here to tell you that terrible, malevolent people exist. They don’t care about hurting other people. Now, you don’t need to spend every waking hour worrying about them, but don’t pretend that they aren’t there and a real danger to you either.
So, please stop trying to take away the right of an individual to protect themselves because of some hand waving about criminals with guns.