Controversial General Political Discussion

H

Herrera95

#36,165
#36,165
Logiko said:
No lol. We have social policies for that.
Click to expand...
Social police won't protect women when they are alone with a man that wants to hurt them.
[automerge]1711529923[/automerge]
Logiko said:
Technology can help, but without good ethics and good politics, technology will only bring chaos.
Click to expand...
Technology has nothing to do with bringing chaos. With or without tech like you said without good ethics (fuck politics) chaos will be installed.
 
Bisoromi Bear

Bisoromi Bear

‎
#36,166
#36,166
Herrera95 said:
Social police won't protect women when they are alone with a man that wants to hurt them.
[automerge]1711529923[/automerge]

Technology has nothing to do with bringing chaos. With or without tech like you said without good ethics (fuck politics) chaos will be installed.
Click to expand...
Fck technology tbh but I'd like to have a gun for self protection, thanks
 
H

Herrera95

#36,173
#36,173
Okamakama said:
I don't think owning a weapon is necessarily a problem.
It's the lack of stringent controls.

It's not really "phobic" to say that we need comprehensive testing to prevent those whom have potentially disastrous mental health conditions from having guns. For their sake and those around them.
Click to expand...
I agree but just to be sure what would be those conditions for you so one can't own a gun.

And we are talking about having it at home or walking around at town?
 
Okamakama

Okamakama

‎
#36,174
#36,174
Herrera95 said:
I agree but just to be sure what would be those conditions for you so one can't own a gun.

And we are talking about having it at home or walking around at town?
Click to expand...
Home protection (private land). Public carry should ideally be only for those in high-risk jobs/situations that require it. At the same time, America has proven its somewhat necessary to have concealed carry.

But private property gun ownership should be allowed 100%.
 
H

Herrera95

#36,175
#36,175
Okamakama said:
Home protection (private land). Public carry should ideally be only for those in high-risk jobs/situations that require it. At the same time, America has proven its somewhat necessary to have concealed carry.

But private property gun ownership should be allowed 100%.
Click to expand...
Agreed but what about the conditions where you can't have it?
 
Okamakama

Okamakama

‎
#36,176
#36,176
Herrera95 said:
Agreed but what about the conditions where you can't have it?
Click to expand...
You mean when you're deemed mentally unfit? Then that should extend to 'at home'. With an individual who is of sound ability to own a gun goes outside with it illegally, then that is a calculated risk; allowing someone who has clear psychological issues to have a gun at home is not.

We cannot infringe on freedom in favour of "protection". It is nothing but authoritarianism. Besides, those who mean you harm will always find a way, weapon prohibition or no.
 
H

Herrera95

#36,180
#36,180
Okamakama said:
You mean when you're deemed mentally unfit? Then that should extend to 'at home'. With an individual who is of sound ability to own a gun goes outside with it illegally, then that is a calculated risk; allowing someone who has clear psychological issues to have a gun at home is not.

We cannot infringe on freedom in favour of "protection". It is nothing but authoritarianism. Besides, those who mean you harm will always find a way, weapon prohibition or no.
Click to expand...
I am not so sure if I'm all freedom if that means less security.

And again what kind of mental issues would you consider uncapable to carry guns? Dementia? Down? Psychopatia?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top