His response, as is mine, is that what people use his guns for simply isn’t his business. If people used Stanley hammers to beat people to death, would it mean that Stanley was an immoral company? Or would it mean that people used the product in an unlawful and immoral way?
I happen to very, very strongly believe in 2A, and I think that the US is in the shitstorm it is currently in in no small part because liberals–but not leftists–have been working their asses off to disarm themselves. And I will note that the person in question has consistently employed furries–he loves their work ethic–and strongly supports the rights of LGBTQ+ people to arm themselves.
Hammers are tools used to build things that someone can decide to use as a weapon. Firearms, specifically handguns and semi automatic AR-style long guns, are literally designed for the sole purpose of ending a human life. Not at all a valid comparison.
What it was designed for, and what it’s used for, are two different things, as you already agreed. Even if you truly, absolutely believe that the only purpose of a handgun or removable-magazine-fed semi-automatic rifle is to kill other people, then you would also have to admit that the overwhelming majority of them never are used to fulfill their purpose; the number that do are, compared to the number that exist, practically a rounding error. There are literally more guns in non-police/non-military hands in the US than there are people. There are far, far more defensive gun uses annually–regardless of who measures it and how–than there are gun homicides.
And bluntly, I absolutely DO NOT trust the gov’t to be the only ones with access to firearms. If you can look at Trump, ICE, Hegseth’s DoD, cops in general, and say, oh, yeah, I shouldn’t be armed, but those guys are cool, well, I don’t know what to tell you. And I don’t trust ANY gov’t to not harm the people, because there’s no way to prevent fascists from taking control without also becoming authoritarian.
For civilians I would assume guns are used more for hunting and target practice.
But then again America could be different you guys are crazy with your guns.
I’m torn on the idea of arming leftists in the current climate. I don’t disagree with you there. I live in a somewhat rural area that is heavy Trump and the right wingers are heavily armed. I don’t blame a trans person for arming themselves to defend themselves in an area like this, and my post history reflects as much.
That said there is a difference between arming yourself and actively contributing to increasing the amount of arms in the world. And what made it interesting is you claimed this is an ethical and moral issue. If your friend worked to only arm leftists that would be an interesting take. I doubt this is the case though. I am assuming they are like any capitalist based on your first line - anyone’s money is good enough.
To answer your question as others have said the hammer has a utilitarian purpose, as do knives, as does dynamite. With the exception of something like skeet shooting guns sole purpose is to rob the consciousness of a living being. I do not believe that the sport outweighs the risk. There are far less dangerous ways to hunt, we’ve banned things like lawn darts for less when the danger outweighs the utility. America just has a raging hard on for guns because of military fetishism
TBH, many of the people that buy his products at this time are leftists. Or at least anti-authoritarian, and deeply suspicious of gov’t control over individual liberties. His position that civil rights are for EVERYONE has meant that many people on the political right have no interest in doing business with him. And he’s absolutely right; if rights aren’t for everyone, then they aren’t rights.
It shouldn’t be a radical position to say that all people in the US should have the rights that they are promised by the US Constitution, and yet we currently have a gov’t that is doing their best to wipe their ass with the constitution and flush it down the toilet.
Who is responsible for the death? The person that intentionally drives a van into a crowd of peaceful protestors, the rental company that didn’t do a full psychological screening and criminal background check before they rented a van to the person that committed the murders, or Ford for making the Econoline van with steel body panels instead of covered in 5’ of closed-cell foam?
His response, as is mine, is that what people use his guns for simply isn’t his business. If people used Stanley hammers to beat people to death, would it mean that Stanley was an immoral company? Or would it mean that people used the product in an unlawful and immoral way?
I happen to very, very strongly believe in 2A, and I think that the US is in the shitstorm it is currently in in no small part because liberals–but not leftists–have been working their asses off to disarm themselves. And I will note that the person in question has consistently employed furries–he loves their work ethic–and strongly supports the rights of LGBTQ+ people to arm themselves.
Hammers are tools used to build things that someone can decide to use as a weapon. Firearms, specifically handguns and semi automatic AR-style long guns, are literally designed for the sole purpose of ending a human life. Not at all a valid comparison.
What it was designed for, and what it’s used for, are two different things, as you already agreed. Even if you truly, absolutely believe that the only purpose of a handgun or removable-magazine-fed semi-automatic rifle is to kill other people, then you would also have to admit that the overwhelming majority of them never are used to fulfill their purpose; the number that do are, compared to the number that exist, practically a rounding error. There are literally more guns in non-police/non-military hands in the US than there are people. There are far, far more defensive gun uses annually–regardless of who measures it and how–than there are gun homicides.
And bluntly, I absolutely DO NOT trust the gov’t to be the only ones with access to firearms. If you can look at Trump, ICE, Hegseth’s DoD, cops in general, and say, oh, yeah, I shouldn’t be armed, but those guys are cool, well, I don’t know what to tell you. And I don’t trust ANY gov’t to not harm the people, because there’s no way to prevent fascists from taking control without also becoming authoritarian.
For civilians I would assume guns are used more for hunting and target practice. But then again America could be different you guys are crazy with your guns.
I’m torn on the idea of arming leftists in the current climate. I don’t disagree with you there. I live in a somewhat rural area that is heavy Trump and the right wingers are heavily armed. I don’t blame a trans person for arming themselves to defend themselves in an area like this, and my post history reflects as much.
That said there is a difference between arming yourself and actively contributing to increasing the amount of arms in the world. And what made it interesting is you claimed this is an ethical and moral issue. If your friend worked to only arm leftists that would be an interesting take. I doubt this is the case though. I am assuming they are like any capitalist based on your first line - anyone’s money is good enough.
To answer your question as others have said the hammer has a utilitarian purpose, as do knives, as does dynamite. With the exception of something like skeet shooting guns sole purpose is to rob the consciousness of a living being. I do not believe that the sport outweighs the risk. There are far less dangerous ways to hunt, we’ve banned things like lawn darts for less when the danger outweighs the utility. America just has a raging hard on for guns because of military fetishism
TBH, many of the people that buy his products at this time are leftists. Or at least anti-authoritarian, and deeply suspicious of gov’t control over individual liberties. His position that civil rights are for EVERYONE has meant that many people on the political right have no interest in doing business with him. And he’s absolutely right; if rights aren’t for everyone, then they aren’t rights.
It shouldn’t be a radical position to say that all people in the US should have the rights that they are promised by the US Constitution, and yet we currently have a gov’t that is doing their best to wipe their ass with the constitution and flush it down the toilet.
Once the rockets go up, who cares where they come down? That’s not my department, says Wernher von Braun
Who is responsible for the death? The person that intentionally drives a van into a crowd of peaceful protestors, the rental company that didn’t do a full psychological screening and criminal background check before they rented a van to the person that committed the murders, or Ford for making the Econoline van with steel body panels instead of covered in 5’ of closed-cell foam?