So the thesis of this book is “let the good people have weapons because bad people also have guns” instead of “let’s, all of us, have no weapons”?
American gun nuts really don’t get how ridiculous they sound to the rest of the world…
The bad people will always have guns, because cops exist. And–spoiler!–cops are not usually on the side of the good guys. Bad guys in mobs certainly didn’t need guns to lynch as many people as they did in the American south. Matthew Shepard wasn’t murdered by people with guns, nor was Sophie Lancaster.
Oppressed minorities will always need to have the means to defend their own lives with violence, and sometimes it’s directly against their own gov’t. The idea that the whole of human history isn’t soaked in blood is, frankly, willfully ignorant. The idea that cops can–or even would–protect you is laughable.
I’m really having a hard time understanding how the two things are connected
Here ya go.
So the thesis of this book is “let the good people have weapons because bad people also have guns” instead of “let’s, all of us, have no weapons”?
American gun nuts really don’t get how ridiculous they sound to the rest of the world…
The bad people will always have guns, because cops exist. And–spoiler!–cops are not usually on the side of the good guys. Bad guys in mobs certainly didn’t need guns to lynch as many people as they did in the American south. Matthew Shepard wasn’t murdered by people with guns, nor was Sophie Lancaster.
Oppressed minorities will always need to have the means to defend their own lives with violence, and sometimes it’s directly against their own gov’t. The idea that the whole of human history isn’t soaked in blood is, frankly, willfully ignorant. The idea that cops can–or even would–protect you is laughable.