(As a general concept of how a society should run, not intended as a US-specific question.)
I sometimes see people on the internet saying that giving people easy access to guns is too risky and there should be stricter gun control, while simultaneously wanting to abolish the police? I’m just confused on what people really want?
You cant both abolish the police and then also disarm the citizens, gotta pick one. So which is it, internet? Self-policing with guns? Or reform the police?
[Please state what country you’re in]
---
(Also its funny how the far-right of the US is both pro-gun and pro-police, I’m confused by that as well)
Absolutely, why should only some people be afforded a right.
Criminals will be criminals, take guns away and they start running cars through crowds.
Try living somewhere that’s not America for a minute.
I mean we’re seeing this in Europe with mass shootins and such, though to a much lesser extent than America.
No, we’re not. There is literally nothing in Europe that happens in a year that compares with the gun violence and homicide rate happens in America in a weekend.
Which is why I said “to a much lesser extent.” Mass shootings are on the rise in multiple European countries, as are homicides and hate crimes. I mean hell, France is looking to restrict knives over this stuff. Having a non-broken society contributes a lot more than what murder weapons are available, and now that European societies are generally fraying at the seams murder rates are unsurprisingly rising.
Yeah, and you keep phrasing that like it’s comparable, it’s not.
Put statistics behind your words if you think they’re rising to a place of being comparable with the US.
Okay I don’t like talking like this, but what part of “to a much lesser extent” do you not understand?
I get it, it just makes it sound like widespread ownership of guns aren’t directly contributing to the problem in a major way.
deleted by creator