“If somebody breaks into my house, they’re getting shot,” she said, laughing. “I probably should not have said that. My staff will deal with that later.”

  • Buddahriffic@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    That’s still the motivation for both sides. I’m not so much commenting on which one is right or wrong as pointing out that the logic won’t be effective at changing minds because the exact same argument can justify either side.

    There was more to the argument above but then it was weakened by “don’t be ruled by fear, fear this other outcome instead”. IMO, it would have been better worded as, “if you fear x, consider whether you should fear y more instead” (or something like that, I’m not the most eloquent).

    The first version is not only contradictory but also full of contempt. There’s an implied “what you’re doing is stupid, but what I’m doing isn’t”, which is fine for people who already agree that the other option is stupid, but can put those who don’t already agree on the defensive.

    • Rekorse@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      You are saying it makes no difference because the logic is the same for both sides, and km saying thats the point.

      The real problem is that people do not evaluate guns appropriately, or themselves.

      One half is regulation: “Do I think I’m a good gun owner? Of course!”, kind of stuff is wrong, but also a very common comment. Its also the requirement for buying a gun. Like a company that creates its own certification, and then certifies itself as safe.

      The other half is a lack of understanding of what owning a gun might mean for the owner, and for this in the house with them, and those in their community. There are situations a gun makes someone safer, but the rest of their family of higher risk, or vice versa. There are also situations where a gun is necessary.

      But we don’t honestly talk about this in America. Guns are always good here. Have a problem involving guns? Guns would have solved it for sure. Dont have a gun in your home? What, do you just want your family to get raped and murdered?

      The lack of nuance is dizzying sometimes.

      • Buddahriffic@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        It was not my intent to say that, I agree with your overall point that it depends on the context and that in most cases a gun will make things more dangerous rather than more safe.

        My point was that using logic that applies to both sides won’t convince anyone who would want to apply it to the other side.

        • Rekorse@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          Yeah I’m not too sure theres much can be done verbally until people stop being their own judge for gun safety. Every argument is defeated soundly by declaring they follow all the right rules, whether they do or not, and I can’t say anything about it because they are the exception. Everyone’s the exception it seems.