this post was submitted on 03 Oct 2024
296 points (97.4% liked)

Asklemmy

43514 readers
1441 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy ๐Ÿ”

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

  1. Open-ended question
  2. Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
  3. Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
  4. Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
  5. An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] HelixDab2@lemm.ee 0 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

Of course the only correct number of gun deaths among civilians is 0, do you disagree with that?

I absolutely do disagree, yes. If my life or safety is being threatened by someone, then I absolutely have the right to use any level of force necessary to defend myself, up to and including lethal force.

BTW, the way that you state that question is a form of manipulation. It's a common tactic used in high-pressure sales.

[โ€“] bjornsno@lemm.ee 2 points 14 hours ago

Ok, I don't agree, it should be up to and including the amount of force necessary to incapacitate whoever is threatening your life. Stun gun and handcuffs yes, handgun no.

Btw the way you drew a false comparison between my argument and road safety is called false equivalence and is an informal fallacy, while we're discussing each other's debating techniques rather than addressing the points made.