• stephen01king@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    5 months ago

    A less than lethal weapon would also, presumably, has less of a deterrent than a gun, wouldn’t you agree?

    Also, you’re assuming that every bigot that dare to bash queer people would also want to be a murderer, which is not likely. Attacking from behind is more likely, but the same thing can still happen even if they are not armed.

    With conceal carry, now you have the exact same probability of being bashed by bigots as not being armed, but you now are more likely to be tried for murder or manslaughter, which the exact thing you’re using as argument against open carrying, so that doesn’t make sense.

    • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      5 months ago

      Not really. Why would you attack someone with a stun gun on their belt? If you’re stupid enough to do that, you’re stupid enough to attack them with a gun on their belt.

      • stephen01king@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        5 months ago

        The risk of death is not the same. What idiot would equate the risk of death from being stunned to being shot by a gun that they would do the exact same thing when confronted with either of them?

              • stephen01king@lemmy.zip
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                5 months ago

                That’s was my answer. The twisted reason they would want to bash queers doesn’t seem like it would be discouraged by a simple stun gun, unlike with an actual gun. Now, why don’t you answer my question?

                Also, remember when you said a bigot would simply attack you from behind when you open carry a gun? What happened to that logic when it comes to stun guns?

                • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  4
                  ·
                  5 months ago

                  The twisted reason they would want to bash queers doesn’t seem like it would be discouraged by a simple stun gun, unlike with an actual gun.

                  That doesn’t explain why, that is just your opinion that it would be. Why would it be?

                  I think your inability to answer this question says a lot.

                  • stephen01king@lemmy.zip
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    5 months ago

                    Maybe you should answer the question, then, since you claim the bigots would just attack a queer open-carrying a gun from the back. You even claim they would rather shoot them instead of backing off if they open carry. What reason are these claims are based on, then?

                    Also, why are you avoiding answering my question, then? Is the logical inconsistency in your own argument prevents you from providing an answer?