• killjoy@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    Either of these men being armed would have resulted in both of their deaths, without doubt.

    Suggesting that more firearms could have prevented or solved anything here is ludicrous.

    • kool_newt@beehaw.orgOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Suggesting that vulnerable people avoid guns or disarm in the face of rising fascism targeting them is ludicrous. That’s not to say every situation would improve, or that this situation would’ve been different.

      Edit: Also, lets be clear, the police don’t need the excuse of you having a weapon to shoot you, they’ve demonstrated repeatedly they will come up with an excuse and likely get away with it.

      • balerion@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        As the kind of person who is targeted by rising fascism, I would prefer you did not speak for us. I am firmly against gun ownership. The statistics show that having a gun on you makes you less safe, not more.

        • Saik0A
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          As the kind of person who is targeted by rising fascism, I would prefer you did not speak for us.

          As someone who knows that you have no idea what “kind of person” @[email protected] is… I would suggest you don’t act like you can take away someones voice on behalf of “your” category of people.

          Nobody can speak for a whole race, color, creed, type, or any other aggregate of people that includes the “whole” of people. They very well could be “vulnerable” themselves and you’ve just dismissed their statement in the affirmative against your stance.

          And to preempt it. You also don’t know who/what I am. So don’t bother with your crappy logic on me either.

          • balerion@beehaw.org
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            I didn’t say they weren’t a vulnerable person, merely that even if they were they did not speak for us.

            • Saik0A
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              1 year ago

              I would prefer you did not speak for us.

              If they cannot represent the entire class of people… Then you can’t either.

              Next time just say “Don’t speak for me”.

                • Saik0A
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Yes… That’s what “us” means.

                  • balerion@beehaw.org
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    Yeah, if I’d literally said, “I speak for us.” All I said was, “You don’t speak for us.” Which is true. I never claimed to be speaking for anyone but myself.

        • kool_newt@beehaw.orgOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Who said I was speaking for “us”? And what makes you think I’m not in that group?

          • balerion@beehaw.org
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            You sure did imply it. And nobody said you weren’t in that group, merely that you did not speak for us.