• TBi@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    26
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 days ago

    In this case it would be akin to someone arguing that you should be allowed drink and drive getting hit by a drunk driver.

    • ObjectivityIncarnate@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      14
      ·
      edit-2
      3 days ago

      No it wouldn’t, that’s a false analogy.

      He didn’t say you should be allowed to shoot people and/or use a gun in any unlawful way (which is what’s analogous to ‘drink and drive’), he said you should be allowed to own a gun (which is what’s equivalent to owning a car).

      • TrousersMcPants@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 days ago

        He literally said that we have to accept people are going to be shot and killed in the name of gun rights though

        • ObjectivityIncarnate@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          3 days ago

          That’s not the same as advocating for killing other people with guns, which is what he would have had to do for him being killed by a gun to be a LAMF.

      • TBi@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        3 days ago

        Maybe someone could own a gun. Possibly a shotgun for a farm or game hunting. But there is no need for anyone to have a hand gun or an AR15.

        So for this analogy: Shotgun = car with regular driver AR15 = car with a drunk driver

        • SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          3 days ago

          but interestingly, Kirk was killed by a single shot outside the range of an AR15. Perhaps a musket, as the forefathers were considering when they wrote the second amendment.

          • ObjectivityIncarnate@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            3 days ago

            Perhaps a musket, as the forefathers were considering when they wrote the second amendment.

            Own a musket for home defense, since that’s what the founding fathers intended. Four ruffians break into my house. “What the devil?” As I grab my powdered wig and Kentucky rifle. Blow a golf ball sized hole through the first man, he’s dead on the spot. Draw my pistol on the second man, miss him entirely because it’s smoothbore and nails the neighbors dog. I have to resort to the cannon mounted at the top of the stairs loaded with grape shot, “Tally ho lads” the grape shot shreds two men in the blast, the sound and extra shrapnel set off car alarms. Fix bayonet and charge the last terrified rapscallion. He Bleeds out waiting on the police to arrive since triangular bayonet wounds are impossible to stitch up. Just as the founding fathers intended.

          • too_high_for_this@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            3 days ago

            outside the range of an AR-15

            Have you ever shot an AR? The effective range is about 600 yards and this shot was 140. That’s stupid easy with an AR. I’m not a great shot and I can easily shoot a <1-inch grouping at 150 yards.

            That being said, it was a bolt action rifle which is inherently more accurate.

        • ObjectivityIncarnate@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          3 days ago

          But there is no need for anyone to have a hand gun

          It’s a good means of self-defense from an assailant. I personally hate guns and would never own one, but I must concede that, for example, women owning guns instantly levels the playing field, re assault and the disadvantage they usually have against a male assailant, etc.

          or an AR15

          Apparently it’s popular enough of a hunting rifle for web pages like this to exist (found via a quick Google), and you already conceded hunting as a justified application for a gun.