LogFAQs > #952438934

LurkerFAQs, Active DB, DB1, DB2, DB3, DB4, DB5, DB6, DB7, Database 8 ( 02.18.2021-09-28-2021 ), DB9, DB10, DB11, DB12, Clear

Topic List	Page List: 1
Topic	Ok, a hot take, but hear me out.
PaunchyTurtle53 04/03/21 9:36:50 PM #17:	Chicken posted... So lets say Im getting mugged. The mugger has a gun because we all have guns. So he shoots me while I draw my gun, and I fire back. I miss and my shot hits someone walking by. Theyre obviously going to shoot back at me right? They wouldnt know or wouldnt care that I was trying to shoot someone else. Literally every altercation would end in blind gunfire from everyone in the area. Where the hell are you getting mugged? Just say, "Hey this asshole is mugging me, would you guys please draw your firearms and not let him shoot me?" Everyone draws their guns. Now the mugger can't shoot you without being shot by everyone. So he would then be apprehended by police and arrested. Simple security camera footage would prove that he was trying to mug you. No bloodshed. No mugging. Or if you're in a non populated area, you don't have to worry about anyone getting caught in the crossfire. But if you get mugged in a non populated area, then this whole theory doesn't matter, because it would play out the same whether everyone was armed or not. Because nobody is around to help you. The mugger would've just gotten a gun and proceeded with the mugging anyways. CARRRNE_ASADA posted... Im not opposed to the logic, but it would fail at keeping people in check. There would simply be more people dying and getting hit by crossfire. Lots of people would default to the gun to deal with more trivial issues. People who would default to gun would quickly and swiftly be delt with by others. People would learn quick. "If I shoot this guy, I will be shot by everyone else." BloodMoon7 posted... That just means the next generation must also throw away their lives, chasing peace for the next generation. You could just...not throw away your life. That's pretty peaceful. In an ideal world, nobody would have to do it. But all of human history has been people dying to protect the future. Think the revolutionary war, the civil war, WWI, WWII, etc. Human have never changed since the dawn of time, and most likely will never. But this may be a step in the right direction. DrizztLink posted... Imagine the fucking Aurora shooting if everyone had a gun. It would have been a fucking bloodbath. If I remember correctly, that was the nightclub right? I need to know what this was before I make a comment. --- The best advice my dad ever gave me was, "Life's full of idiots, don't be one." <cite>PaunchyTurtle53 posted [p:952438934] in Ok, a hot ... [t:79386041]...</cite> <quote>Chicken posted... </cite> <quote>So lets say Im getting mugged. The mugger has a gun because we all have guns. So he shoots me while I draw my gun, and I fire back. I miss and my shot hits someone walking by. Theyre obviously going to shoot back at me right? They wouldnt know or wouldnt care that I was trying to shoot someone else. Literally every altercation would end in blind gunfire from everyone in the area.</quote>Where the hell are you getting mugged? Just say, "Hey this asshole is mugging me, would you guys please draw your firearms and not let him shoot me?" Everyone draws their guns. Now the mugger can't shoot you without being shot by everyone. So he would then be apprehended by police and arrested. Simple security camera footage would prove that he was trying to mug you. No bloodshed. No mugging. Or if you're in a non populated area, you don't have to worry about anyone getting caught in the crossfire. But if you get mugged in a non populated area, then this whole theory doesn't matter, because it would play out the same whether everyone was armed or not. Because nobody is around to help you. The mugger would've just gotten a gun and proceeded with the mugging anyways. CARRRNE_ASADA posted... </cite> <quote>Im not opposed to the logic, but it would fail at keeping people in check. There would simply be more people dying and getting hit by crossfire. Lots of people would default to the gun to deal with more trivial issues.</quote>People who would default to gun would quickly and swiftly be delt with by others. People would learn quick. "If I shoot this guy, I will be shot by everyone else." BloodMoon7 posted... </cite> <quote>That just means the next generation must also throw away their lives, chasing peace for the next generation. You could just...not throw away your life. That's pretty peaceful.</quote>In an ideal world, nobody would have to do it. But all of human history has been people dying to protect the future. Think the revolutionary war, the civil war, WWI, WWII, etc. Human have never changed since the dawn of time, and most likely will never. But this may be a step in the right direction. DrizztLink posted... </cite> <quote>Imagine the fucking Aurora shooting if everyone had a gun. It would have been a fucking bloodbath.</quote>If I remember correctly, that was the nightclub right? I need to know what this was before I make a comment. --- The best advice my dad ever gave me was, "Life's full of idiots, don't be one."</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Topic List	Page List: 1