I'm still stuck at the part of "let's buy/get a gun".
Disclaimer: I'm from somewhere in the EU.
Disclaimer: I'm from somewhere in the EU.
Guns can be a fun sportive/recreational tool. They are of course dangerous and deadly when misused, but so can be a lot of other recreational tools.
The main problem is the US’ gun culture and that a lot of people buy them either because of fear-mongering or to make a political statement, with safe use & enjoyment being a secondary concern. Having so many guns out there in the hands of people who are poorly trained at using them safely & harmlessly is the problem.
In a location with a healthy gun culture, or no specific culture associated with them, a gun would be considered as boring as any other dangerous sports equipment, there would be less problems - there would be a lot less guns around but the ones that will remain will be in the hands of passionate users who actually have the skill, training and mental state to enjoy them safely and responsibly.
Sorry to nitpick, but I strongly disapprove of this sentence because it hides the fact that guns are weapons, and generally speaking most "other recreational tools" are not.
Of course guns are dangerous and deadly, they're guns. If other recreational tools were as readily dangerous and deadly as guns, access to their usage would be a lot more restricted.
Which also implies the "when misused" description is deceptive. What are guns designed to do? Like, when looking at their affordances[0], what was a gun originally made to do? SMBC had a nice take on it[1].
Of course it is true that we're not supposed to kill people, but "misused" here expands to "someone used a thing explicitly designed to be good at killing people, and in the process got someone killed, which means they misused it". Depending on intent that is perhaps "morally" correct, but otherwise it shifts attention away from the part where guns being dangerous and deadly is inherent to what makes them guns.
And don't get me wrong, I fully agree with the rest of what you're saying. I totally understand when people have a fascination for weapons and agree there should be space for passionate, responsible enthusiasts. But that's exactly why I'm a bit hung up on this: to me, a responsible enthusiast would never undersell how dangerous guns are, and part of the cause of a messed up gun culture is not respecting that danger.
> I totally understand when people have a fascination for weapons and agree there should be space for passionate, responsible enthusiasts.
Well, thank you for letting us live !
Where I live, it's not exactly easy to legally get a hand gun and you can only do so after you proved that you're responsible, sane, and respect the safety rules. It's a process that can take a year, with multiple tests that you have to renew along your life. The behaviour described in this article would lead a shooter to lose his right to detain a handgun (I speak about detention, there is no right to carry guns here).
Long story short, don't fear shooters that are having fun at your local gun range, they wouldn't do anything that stupid and they know damn well the dangers.
People in suburban cities getting guns illegally is a completely different matter though, and the shootings there are completely out of control, including shooting automatics while riding a bike or firing at buildings. And yes, pathetic clowns doing the "celebratory gunfire" thing.
Lol wut? My entire family is "responsible gun owners" who repeatedly engage in harmful gun culture stuff, keeping guns around young kids, mixing alcohol and drugs with firearms, and NOT STOPPING EACH OTHER FROM DOING THAT
I have no trust in people who say "no no no the responsible gun owners are fine" because they always claim that the people who did dangerous things were "no responsible gun owners" when stuff inevitably happens. It's a tautology to try and pretend like the people doing all the stupid things aren't very similar to the people who say we should trust them.
And I'm not! Apologies if I came across that way. I'm only nitpicking on the language used when discussing guns here. I want the discussion of guns to be as respectful of (the dangers of) guns as responsible gun owners are with actual guns.
And as long as people don't casually walk down the street with a chain saw or keep one under their pillow I don't really see the problem. The problem with guns is that people do handle them in unsafe ways (at least in the US). Switzerland for example has lots of guns, but people handle them differently than in the US.
You can be quite irresponsible with sword and still cause significantly less damage or potential for damage then someone who is almost responsible with a gun.
>Sorry to nitpick, but I strongly disapprove of this sentence because it hides the fact that guns are weapons, and generally speaking most "other recreational tools" are not.
It is the nature of humans that we are good at repurpose things. Exactly the same can be said about about almost anything like cars/bikes/boats. Initial design was not for recreation and fun but we repurpose them and even start to build exactly for that. Te same goes for firearms - race guns exist and they are design from ground up to shoot paper and steel :)
Here is Polish article, with a lot of data about gun violence distrubution in USA: https://www.hoplofobia.info/kartograficzna-analiza-przestepc...
And some USA native info: https://www.hoplofobia.info/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/Antho...
The only time I’ve ever seen a gun at a wedding was a police officer working the event.
The only discussion now is which people.