Liberty, Freedom and being "ok"

54 posts / 0 new
Last post
wgusapukc's picture
Liberty, Freedom and being "ok"

"For to be Free is not merely to cast off one's chains but to live in a way that respects and enhances the Freedom of others."

Nelson Mandela 1918-2013

I wish to start with possibly touchy topic to talk about a touchy topic. Though I don't want to trudge up my own memory nor your bad memories I may need to to prove my point.

"Is an airplane dangerous?"

The consensus is rightly, "Yes, absolutely!"

Tons metal held together by tiny rivets, flying at hundreds or thousands of miles an hour!

There are thousands of them flying right this second above you, with up to hundreds of people on-board each, all very much in need of a lot of protection.

Airplanes are dangerous and need to be held to a universal standard where pilots, mechanics, etc. need to be trained, certified and when appropriate licensed.

This necessary and very valid problem was addressed In 1938, roughly 30 years after the Write Brothers perfected flight.

The government saw the potential lethality towards the public that airplanes present and the need for regulations.

Immediately our protective body, the United States Government, stepped up and started what exists today where 4 billion passengers flew in 2017 with only 10 incidents bad enough to kill 79 people.

So the answer is actually "No, airplanes are not dangerous". Really not at all when their potential is taken into account and mitigated

There are 300+ million people in the United States and 300+ million guns. Unregulated, unregistered and that number is an estimate only because it is viturally impossible to present a valid number. This is not due to criminal activity or untoward activity, but due to there being no way in place to say "the USA has X guns" anywhere near a fact.

This year there have been 3,338 known gun deaths and it is not tax season. Winter storms, hell it's not even April.

3,338 people who deserved the same level of safety they find hurtling around the atmosphere.
In their homes, schools, parks, playgrounds, theaters, at work or play why is there nothing protecting us?

I live in Peru, a Second/Third-World country (no disrespect intended), comparatively behind the United States by years and far from the comfort of home. I did this solely to get away from the threat of violence and to give my children a better "SHOT"!

This is not out of a conspiracy, or perceived, clandestine threat from within or without, this is from my direct experience. From my neighbors.

I am an ex-paramedic, critical-care and flight for 15 years, was the lead medic for an international search and rescue team, I attended medical school (though it was not completed), I am ex-US army, a writer, I've worked with the American Red Cross and American Heart Association, I've lived in 9 states and many large cities and rural areas and I shot my first gun at an age young enough that such an experience, often remembered like your first kiss, wasn't profound an activity for me to remember.

Currently I do not own a gun because I honestly don't need one. In the States I have owned shotguns and handguns.

I have been exposed to the deaths of these 3,338 people and if I quoted the period during my EMS career instead of 2017 at least a few breathed their last breaths within my attempted help, each of my 15 years.
Babies, children, teens, women, men, LGBT members, pregnant, completely abled or totally disabled, police, criminals, most races, most religious beliefs all of them dying due the near-sighted governments ineffectiveness to prevent their deaths.

Whether every or no weapons are removed from the streets at least regulate them, license them, check backgrounds throughly, present the consumer with sensible products and investigate the purpose of the purchase. It took more paperwork to get the IPhone I am typing this on then the combined threat of every weapon or bullet I have ever owned.

People don't feel "ok". We all want, need and deserve to be at least "ok", but gun-violence makes this impossible. Plain and simple!

Liberty and Freedom are founding principles and the government by and for the people is tasked to ensure these are granted to all citizens and visitors alike.

There is no Liberty nor Freedom for the 3,338, nor their families and friends, nor anyone effected by the tragic loss of their Liberty and Freedom not for a purpose, a "just" cause, only because guns are fun, and only because there are so many that feel a need to protect themselves that THEY buy a gun adding to the cyclic problem.

"A well regulated militia to protect against ternary" is absolutely important and valid. If you want to play with a gun, simple do it in the well-regulated environment of a well- regulated militia.

Let's help the thousands yet to die in the rest of 2018 and the hundreds of millions who have yet to be touched by this problem, because they WILL!

Liberty and Freedom doesn't mean do any and everything you want.

People need to have regulations in order to have Liberty and Freedom. When slavery was finally legally made bad the Construction was changed to protect the newly accepted citizens.

When booze was seen as bad it was made illegal in a knee-jerk move and the Constitution was mended, when the mood changed and the Constitution was amended it didn't mean 100% of alcohol was legal and available, it was regulated.

These and thousands of other examples show the fluidity of the Constitution and laws.
The fact that this wasn't done under President Obama a democrat, liberal, leftist, socialist, communist, Kenyan, lizard man, illuminati stooge or whatever box your personal facts place him in for you, at his he peak he sadly did nothing to stop this. This shows clearly the need goes beyond labels. And the protection won't be fixed when the next democrat gets into office.

What I wish to do is to utilize the existing gun law as a template and start legally attacking the government where it hurts most, the wallet.

If you have been effected by gun violence and can prove that it was a result of the governments laws you absolutely, morally, legally and in the memory of the lost, sue the government.

If a plane crash is blamed directly on a short sided legal issue you can sue for the damages the legal issue caused.

Go after the manufactures, designers, and sellers of what has caused you so much pain.
If an engine falls off mid-flight you don't say to those depending on the life lost that there was nothing you can do, an "act of god", wouldn't fly.

I have been very much in the blood spilled but fortunately no one in my life has been directly been effected but if it had I wouldn't sit dumb and happy within a cloud of well meaning wishes and prayers, I would be contacting the ACLU.

I would not just be bringing it to Washington, I would take it into the Supreme Court.

Liberty, Freedom, the lives lost and yet to be lost, and simply being "ok" is enough to push much harder at the problem.

Good luck to you all and those you love and care about,


Subscription Note: 

Choosing to subscribe to this topic will automatically register you for email notifications for comments and updates on this thread.

Email notifications will be sent out daily by default unless specified otherwise on your account which you can edit by going to your userpage here and clicking on the subscriptions tab.

Cognostic's picture
This number is Wikki 2013

This number is Wikki 2013

33,636 deaths due to "injury by firearms" This is a fake number by all standards/ People are killed legally every day by police and by home owners. The number of legal shooting deaths must be subtracted at the very least.

Next, there are accidental deaths and injuries. These threaten no one and are simply the result of errors; dropping a gun and accidentally being in the path of the discharge. Loading your own bullets and having one go off on you. etc.... These deaths can also be subtracted. (505 deaths due to accidental or negligent discharge.)

All suicides can be eliminated. The fact that someone chose a gun to kill themselves is completely irrelevant. A suicidal person, one genuinely suicidal, will always find a way to kill them-self. A gun is not a part of the equation. (21,175 suicides).

We are actually only concerned with the homicides. And as far as public safety goes, most homicides occur between people who shoot people they know. The statistics for random shootings are insanely low.


And here is another statistic for you: All shootings: Some 13,286 people were killed in the US by firearms in 2015, according to the Gun Violence Archive, and 26,819 people were injured

26,819 is a huge decrease and we still need to subtract suicides, police shootings, legal shootings, domestic shootings between people that know one another before we ever get to public safety issues.

GUN VIOLENCE IS DOWN AND YOU ARE SAFER THAN EVER as long as you trust your spouse or business partner.

If someone is going to murder you they are going to murder you. The gun is just the tool they choose to use.

wgusapukc's picture
Excellent comment,

Excellent comment,
But the fact that even the figure of authority in our society needs to be armed is exactly what I am talking about. If there weren't so freakin many weapons floating around there would be no perceived need to arm the police, some yes, all no freakin way. People with mental disorders, un-diagnosed or not, temporary or not who are, because of guns causing harm and perceived harm we have no freedom of movement, going to school, work, anywhere including staying at home hoping for safety where there is none.
I claim that everyone has the ability to get us so far we can't even imagine it.
Each of us is vital. If you believe you have a soul and you are against abortion but are pro-guns I would like to mention a concept of our actual Vice-President, a retraining center, heavy medication and a freakin lot of therapy, maybe someday your kids can see you behind a see-through wall.
Suicides, I actually am pro euthanasia for people who have hit a complete wall at our level of technology in order to prevent further suffering. Here in is the problem. It is Friday and it's been a bad one. You have reached towards, let's look at the devil's drool, alcohol. You are deeply intoxicated, your friends who were supposed to join you for the big game and they are late. By halftime you are blitzed and wallowing by perceived shunning of your friends.
Your mom calls and says "not only you were adopted but she intententially built your hatred towards who you secretely are. You look on, very bleary-eyed in the hopes your team will pick your spirits there's always "the Bears". Within the excitement of the last seconds a play that happens that has never been seen before by your favorite player leading in losing the superbowl. Before you can even figure out what happened the announcer comes on and says that your favorite player intentially threw the game for ISIL.
A knock comes to the door and you quickly realize the knocking has been happening for some time. You open the door and the cop who put your supposed "father" in jail on your 8th birthday is standing next to father Brian the image of god's love on Earth you turned to within figuring the loss of your father. When you hear his voice voice the comfort you feel by his presence is quickly replaced with a fear and repulsion as you relieve his sexual abuse.
When you can hear again it is your priests voice telling you your friends all died in a wreck. You can't hear it and can't understand it. Nothing is real anymore, nothing is "ok". You pick up your gun seeing it as the only way out and no one responds to the explosive exclamation of your need for help.
This is justified enough to be necessary in less than a couple of minutes to be seen as the only way out, the only answer. An absolute fact to the mind presented and the minds of many other paths towards capulating to the game of life. The big roll of dice which could kill you before 2 cells became 4 or 100+ it's a crap-shoot.
Without the gun you will well be able to kill yourself. But a gun turns your ability to find a better way from a couple minutes to days with pills, I knife plundged into the heart through the protective chest plate will take minutes to reach out. A large amount of the people who has survived an attempt said that as soon as they squeezed the trigger, stepped off the ledge, swallowed a bottle of hopefully a painless death that they immediately regretted the act. Not out of pain or fear of the unknown that that step represented, but that they realized they had something to live for, something else to try, in the bliss of the hormonal to what you are doing makes you feel so good it gives you hope beyond hope.
Suicide is not a cowardly act it is beyond brave to consider throwing in the towel, but to do it put's one in the league who rush a machine gun, throws themselves on a grenade, or is able to find any semblance of humanity in the war-zone that was their front yards.
There is absolutely not different. You are saying this action almost certainly ends all dreams, goals, love, in their, or your life but it is the answer which is fact to me. Do you think a person body-slamming a grenade is thinking anything when they make the sacrifice, no, in that instance the rule of 3s has only placed them beyond the rule of 3 milliseconds, next step at 3 seconds you only have the time to see it as lethal and in the split second your action is not your own it is the result in playing out the situation in your mind. You placed yourself on the gernade before the gernade possible was made. It is exactally the same for those who flee, preprogramed heroism or sefl-preservation. Just like them the person ready to introduce a bullet to their brain box has thought this through, if you don't have an escape plan you are not aware of the rules of the game.
Good luck our there and thanks for joining me in this important discussion
Gun equals immediecy by design which benefits the heroic giver of all,

mykcob4's picture
Gog you are dead wrong on

Gog you are dead wrong on this issue. You stated that accidental gun injuries should not be counted. It is still an injury or death by a gun so they should be included. You said that we shouldn't count people killed by the police or homeowner. Why not? The fact is if there had not been a gun no one would have been shot. You also said that suicides shouldn't be counted. Why not? If the suicide is committed with a gun it most certainly should be counted. In fact, any injury or death caused by a gun should be counted because if there was no gun there would not be an injury or death. I am sick and tired of conservative assholes justifying this bullshit!
Gun stats are erroneous simply because of the fact that the NRA successfully lobbied that the Federal government cannot keep such statistics and are forbidden to publish any information. So we have to rely on state and local governments to provide that information which only about half do.
So there is NO WAY to know if gun violence is down. There is no valid information or data available. So you can't state that gun violence is down.

god's God's picture
"If there was no gun there

"If there was no gun there would not be an injury or death." You can't necessarily make that claim as far as home defense, suicide, and police encounters go. I see you're pretty passionate about your politics but calling people "conservative assholes" might be a bit of a stretch. You can't be sure that everyone in favor of private gun ownership is a conservative.

wgusapukc's picture
Good work god's God,

Good work god's God,
The statement is not "NO GUN NO DEATH" the statement is if there is no guns the possibility of being killed by a gun is profoundly reduced. There are no absolutes, no black and white and I strive to "never" say "never".
As for your continued point that calling anyone an "asshole, idiot, stupid or less than" shows your own inability to see the worth in everyone's opinion,
The thing that needs to be examined is the cyclic need of gun or any weapon designed to hinder or end life. Being at least in the range of "ok" is what should be the goal. The empowerment of everyone and increasing their safety and worth, and even observing that anyone's death or harm effect us all.

Points well made,

Good luck out there

mykcob4's picture
Okay god's god, no gun no gun

Okay god's god, no gun no gun death! The fact is that injury or death by gun is WAAAAAY too easy. No, I am not sure that everyone in favor of private gun ownership is a conservative asshole, but conservative assholes are driving the issue and endorsing irresponsible gun ownership and usage. Guns are completely unnecessary in the civilian world...COMPLETELY!

god's God's picture
I agree there are a lot of

I agree there are a lot of bad politics surrounding the issue and I don't dispute that if there are no guns there would be no gun death/injury. However I see the utility of gun ownership for self defense especially since a gun would level out any physical advantages. As far as self defense goes one wouldn't need to kill an assailant either. I don't own a gun but I've thought about it for self defense.
edit: I'm pretty open minded on the subject. I'm not big on guns but I've had conversations with people who might not be alive if they weren't armed. The conversation that really stuck out the most to me was my friend's dad who was a trucker. He told me that he was attacked at a gas station by two men (one of them had a tire iron) so he pulled out his gun fired a warning shot and they ran. That situation might have been worse if he wasn't armed.

mykcob4's picture
I can't attest to testimony.

I can't attest to testimony. I doubt that you are lying or even your friend, but the plain truth is that people that have had a gun for self-protection are far more likely to be shot with that weapon than shooting the intended target. An almost 2-1 ratio as a matter of fact.
If you do decide to get a firearm, better get a shotgun. They are easier to use, you don't have to be accurate and are less likely to shoot yourself. However, that doesn't mean that they are safe. By no means are they.
As a side note. I was once mugged by 2 men. They attacked me with a motorcycle chain and a knife from a blind side. After an initial assault, they took my wallet and left. Heres the thing. If a mugger uses a gun they will kill you. They are not afraid of capital punishment. If you have a gun it won't make a difference other than the fact you will make another gun available for the mugger. If you have a gun and someone attacks you, you won't be able (in most cases) to get your gun out to protect yourself and that gun will be taken away from you by the mugger. It's not like the TV when Charles Bronson is approached by thugs and he has time to pull out a pistol and blow them away. Most attacks are on unsuspecting people if they are armed or not. In Texas, we have an open carry law. Ironically there was a rash of people carrying that were mugged FOR their gun.

wgusapukc's picture
Great work,

Great work,
I agree it seems like a huge problem but it isn't near what been overcome for god, for country, for gold, power.....
As for guns as a tool for defense, they very much seem to be, but they are never for defense and never are a deterrent. To see that the life you live is so not "ok" you feel a need to pick up a gun you are taking offensive stance against something you feel mentally ill-equipped to deal with.
There is no positive use for a gun I can think of that outweighs the negitivity within that couple of penny bullets possibilities.
Remember you live in the most powerful country in the World in the most advanced, long lived time in known history. Literally in your life you have the possibility to perhaps walk on Mars or spend Memorial weekend on the moon hunting for golf balls in low gravity. You, right now, could decide to go anywhere in the World and with the right number of bills or credit you could get there before an ADD suffer can get bored. All the hopes and possibilities victories and failures of life and death within every minute of the lives of every ancestor, familial or furry or microbial has resulted in putting you where you are. Put you in a place and time where in seconds if you have basically any question you not only can find a plethora of research, notes and books but audio, video, lessons for children, teens and or adults.
And yet in this fantastic and very fortunate time and place to be alive, possibly the best time ever and yet you feel so far from "ok" in a supposed land of Freedom and Liberty you have been painted into the corner of apathy where you actually don't want to get rid of guns because they are so dangerous you don't want to ban them encase you need to get your hands on one.
I am so sorry. I am so much on your side and so equally impacted by it I have moved myself and my family away from our home, a "First World Country" to a perceived lessor nation because it IS safer.
I hope it all changes before you want or need to buy a gun and very much before you or anyone you love or really anyone to be honest fall victim to a bullet.

Good luck out there

wgusapukc's picture
Well spoken mykcob4 but I

Well spoken mykcob4 but I want to add one additional category you missed which is accidental discharges. Again your very valid point of more or less "no gun no death by gun" statement again fits.
An additional caveat is that because guns are seen as "ok" in the hands of our citizenry that "ok"ness is utilized to sell the weapons I am fighting against abroad.
When sales of cigarettes slumped in the States due to the knowledge that they were forcibly enhanced to increase addiction and other practices including selling to children, they went to every other corner of the World where to the misery of life a smoke is actually positive and when all education is controlled by the company selling the lethal product, "why the hell not fill my lungs?" Killing those situationally predisposed towards reaching hope presented in their earlier death.
The gun issue of needing a gun to protect from those with guns trying to do the same is Worldwide. The selling of death is completely amoral especially when the bottom line is a shiny new car, a tower block, or a presidency a drive towards wealth at the cost of the Liberties and Freedoms of others is the reality here.

Good luck out there

Sheldon's picture
Way too long a post, and

Way too long a post, and something of a tortured analogy as well. The Wright brothers made (arguably) the first flight, not write (sic) brothers. They hardly perfected it either. Commercial jets fly at around 350 miles an hour not "hundreds of thousands of miles an hour".

Your gun deaths total sounds dubious if I'm honest.

Whilst I'm largely in agreement over the need for any civilised country to have laws controlling the ownership of firearms, your analogy is not a good one for a variety of reasons.

A gun is designed for lethal force. It's that simple. Commercial jets would be poor business indeed if that was their sole use.

A better argument is that nobody in the US outside of law enforcement and the army need to own automatic weapons. If they need a firearm to protect themselves at all, then that's probably another argument for gun control.

Lastly the gun manufacturers are making a lot of money and so can afford huge political leverage. You might want to consider when next you vote what position the people asking for your vote take on issues like gun control.

Gun companies can influence the way politicians vote on single issues like gun control, but so can you, perhaps more so.

I think the first and possibly biggest task is to change the cultural attitude towards gun ownership in the US. Sadly I think the mass shootings are the strongest influence on this. Which means it might get worse before it gets better.

wgusapukc's picture
Good point but didn't the

Good point but didn't the Wright's take something no one else could do and make it actually work?
Excellent point on gathered staticial data on flight speeds of commercial air travel. Would someone have gotten off the ground? Yes, were they exclusively able to fit their feat into the confines of success. Yes we go fast now, but without the first person ever saying "wow it would be neat to fly!' also needs to be included into the equation. You get on a plane it is directly related to the innovation to the two.
What was meant to be said was hundreds or thousands of miles of hour. As you may not be aware I wasn't speaking of commercial airliners I was speaking of the achievement the SR71 was divulged to be able to reach speeds of mach 3, that's 3 times the speed of sound or more than 2,000 miles an hour, ie thousands.
As for my possible "dubious" numbers I was in a flow and asked Google, if it was one or ten thousand more or less it wouldn't matter to you if one of them was someone you wished a bright future for.
To see the statement as a possible "dubious" number is missing the entirety of my point. That is why I made it full of this and that which in someway pertains to my point to show you not "X people died, bad! Good luck our thoughts and prayers float for you.
Are not commercial jets by design built for death, yes the Wright's got off the ground but the only reason we have the ability to go "350 miles per hour", thanks for the help with my argument thought your number is no where near fact, The only reason "ME GO FAST!" was not innovation it was to make us better at killing each other, just like a gun. If you can't visualize the connection I may need to go deeper into my explanation.
Your point about a better argument is very much stated with my attempt to explain my point. It is not automatic weapons however that is the problem it is the availability of death at the corner store and all the ammo you want, "Half-off, Merry Christmas!"
Why are the cops designed to "PROTECT AND SERVE" in need of lethal force immediately ready when so much else could be used to "CONTROL AND SUBJUGATE". Included in this is the STATISTICAL FACT that walking into any situation with a gun in not a peaceful move even in the important game of global one-upsmanship (I am aware this is misspelled). There was just as much power, control and successful force and legality when we hadn't perfection of a steal blade. All guns do is make the process between thinking and killing one of milliseconds. No time to consider the ramifications of what is about to happen.
Remember black powder when discovered wasn't a drive to kill or control it was the lofty quest to make life better for all. They were searching out immortality not death at the walmart.
As to the relevance of my vote cast hoping for change, trump didn't win when you look at the concept of Democracy as one person one vote. Secondly President Obama had House, Senate, and the High Court. The person who touted 'hope' which I happily bought into and don't regret my decision, completely, but not only did I have 'hope' but the Democratic system showed us all that our votes mattered. But with all steps into power from any lower level the bottom line quickly changes and the things that said putting you there are no longer facts for your hope, your roll of the dice came in your favor.
It is within the tenants of the Constitution and Bill of Rights to see that where we are is wrong, that money have replaced any thoughts of the citizens. I also attempted to "keep it short" so you could consume in little pieces and so my political views didn't need to be stated.
Lastly there is NO might. It WILL get worse and is getting worse every second spent hoping something gets better. This is not small and may spark some attempted revolution but needing a gun to feel "ok" because others need guns to feel "ok" because others need them is the dominant concept in the United States' and the World's reality.
I try to always examine all that passes between my ears by "A repeated action performed towards anticipated change in results is the picture of stupidity." Albert Einstein's words and how I perceive them.
Absolutely everything attempted or not attempted in the United States pertaining to firearms has failed. No one is looking ahead and instead are stuck in a look of inability.
The reason I posted what I did and why I wrote these words towards your critique isn't to say I have THE answer, and absolutely not that you are wrong at all in your opinions, they are your facts as you strive to be "ok".
What I am attempting is to force the conversation from where I am able as I feel everyone should do. To look at my thoughts and say they are wrong and stop is only saying "it is much easier for me at this time to believe what you said as factually incorrect" and not add to the problem.
Again the Wright's didn't at all do it on their own in our quest to get from a go b faster. Each one examining the problem has the potential towards insight unimaginable except to that individual.
Be part of the change to what you see as not "ok". March if you can, smoke cigarettes all night at your computer and try to explain your thoughts, or at least give the problem enough of your time to see if the spark to change it all might come from your lovely brain Evolved towards finding such important solutions.

Good luck out there

Sheldon's picture
Far too long a post again,

Far too long a post again, please leave the tortured analogies alone, and just stick to the topic. You seem to be suggesting the police shouldn't be armed now, that's a mistake.

"There was just as much power, control and successful force and legality when we hadn't perfection of a steal blade."

You have the theist habit of making sweeping un-evidenced claims I see, and you're wrong. Research indicates that we are less likely to meet a violent death now that at any point in human history, and that is allowing for the anomaly of recent global wars. Though I don't rea;;y see the connection between your unevidenced claim and reducing gun crime?

"No one is looking ahead and instead are stuck in a look of inability."


"not that you are wrong at all in your opinions, they are your facts as you strive to be "ok"."

I don't know what this means, but something is a fact independently of personal opinion. so they're not my facts. Only Donald Trump thinks that facts can be personal opinion. The answer to reducing gun crime is evidenced in many other countries in the developed west, countries that all have low rates of gun crime and strict laws controlling gun ownership.

""it is much easier for me at this time to believe what you said as factually incorrect"

I don't know what you're referring to unless make specific reference. Again the answer is simple, as it has been evidenced in countries elsewhere that strict gun control reduces gun crime. It shouldn't really need explaining to anyone that less guns axiomatically mean less risk of gun crime, it's how the US achieve this is the problem, as there is a cultural attitude towards gun ownership in the US that is very different to other developed western democracies.

"Why are the cops designed to "PROTECT AND SERVE" in need of lethal force immediately ready when so much else could be used to "CONTROL AND SUBJUGATE". "

I'd have thought that was obvious, and it's silly to think they use lethal force as a first response, or imply they use lethal force with little or no thought. Humans are fallible and there will always be the potential for tragic human error, but gun crime in the US is not a result of the police being armed.

wgusapukc's picture
Thanks for your opinion, "not

Thanks for your opinion, "not that you are wrong at all in your opinions, they are your facts as you strive to be "ok".
I don't know what this means, but something is a fact independently of personal opinion. so they're not my facts.
I agree that a fact SHOULD be independent of personal opinion but it is not. A fact to me 100% is what I make of it.
If I say "there is no god!" for me that is a fact that runs my life and yet it is equally a fact that there "is a god or gods" to the next person. Facts, even when statically presented are different in my life than in yours.
All the things that you use to logically make sense of your view of the world are real, facts to you and yet the fact that your facts are wrong to me and my facts is what I mean.

Good luck out there

Sheldon's picture
wgusapukc says "I agree that

wgusapukc says "I agree that a fact SHOULD be independent of personal opinion but it is not."

a view or judgement formed about something, not necessarily based on fact or knowledge.

"Facts, even when statically presented are different in my life than in yours."

No they're not, I can't tell whether you're being deliberately obtuse or are really this dumb, but a fact is not based on opinion, and it's in the fucking definitions, so I suspect you're trolling.
"All the things that you use to logically make sense of your view of the world are real, facts to you and yet the fact that your facts are wrong to me and my facts is what I mean."

I have read that 4 times, and it remains incomprehensible gibberish.

reasoning conducted or assessed according to strict principles of validity.

These are not matters of opinion, and facts as the dictionary shows are things known or proven to be true. Opinions as the dictionary also shows are not necessarily based on facts. You're talking nonsense I'm afraid.

It is a fact that the earth is not the centre of our solar system, it is a fact the earth is not flat. Now you can easily find opinions that disagree with these facts, but they remain facts, and those opinions remain wrong because they are disagreeing with facts.
"If I say "there is no god!" for me that is a fact that runs my life and yet it is equally a fact that there "is a god or gods" to the next person."

No they're not facts, they're assertions that you have to demonstrate evidence for if they are to be more than mere opinion. The assertion there is a deity would need evidence demonstrated for it before I would believe it, since no one has demonstrated any objective evidence I do not believe it to be true, that is not the same as making a contrary claim.

Your thinking is so muddled and wrong it's hard to believe you are not trolling.

algebe's picture
@Sheldon The Wright brothers

@Sheldon The Wright brothers made (arguably) the first flight, not write (sic) brothers.

The Wright Brothers' flight may have been preceded by one in New Zealand. A farmer and inventor called Richard Pearse is thought to have made a powered flight in 1902. Peter Jackson made a documentary (some say a mockumentary) about it called Forgotten Silver in 1995.

wgusapukc's picture
Excellent observation and

Excellent observation and point,
When I stated what I did placing probable fact as fact I was trying to use the success not as historical fact but as an example of the process of finding a threat, flying metal cigars around the sky, "might just drive right into anything!"
There is no way of saying that the first flight even happened in this millennia. The same way you can't say that Mr. Bolt is the fastest,
"miss universe" the the prettiest, nor that the late, great Steven Hawking was ever anywhere near the "smartest MAN alive".
Not only are facts subjective and change at whim, but did some group of people search garbage patches, arctic villages, was there any attempt to even look to see if someone is faster or smarter. They are the perceived best and nothing more.
Now that you have that if you are still able to focus, the next step is to utilize these facts. Look upon everyone for their potential and not as them to be feared and protected against.
Each and every one of us are doing the exact same thing. If able to (threat isn't immediate enough, and level of Adrenaline brought upon trying to take that next breath dips every now and then) evaluate their facts, all their facts, to ensure they are not just an attempt to achieve what you want, trying to be "ok" but hurting others or what you follow isn't against your personal morality facts. Do all you can to not do harm, absolutely attempt to mitigate harm in every action.
Liberty and Freedom and "ok" are totally subjective terms but that doesn't mean you can't work towards your ideal of them. For true Liberty, true Freedom, truly being "ok" are not at all subjective.
To attack with your facts about abortion without seeing what someone must go through, since finding an accident has occurred there has been no "ok", no peace. Making an appointment, can you even imagine? Just because you think it is wrong, to see someone, another Human being in such a desperate situation they end the possibility of the life their body evolved to achieve.
So there she is, very possible below the age of consent, a child herself making a very adult decision, The possibilities for good outweigh the knowledge of the situation. You have a baby alone, you are a pariah, ostracized by your "god fearing" neighbors because you had sex, kicked out of her family, "the fucking tramp, whore", kicked out of her church if she is religously inclined. No sex before marriage plus you can't use a condom to prevent the pregnancy she has in a very ethical, moral, safe and cheap manor defeating a demon for so many years has plagued us. She needs love and understanding, help but all turn their backs on her.
So yes, at 15 with no protection and education to prevent it only superstition and threat which never work, this poor child hunted down by the male of the species, doesn't matter if he is 12 or 112 he used his very capable mind and the techniques of lying and manipulation taught by everyone at every encounter of his life to achieve one thing in life, the faster the better, "get that dick into that chick!" or whatever their flavor. Alone, ready to kill herself from the heartless family, society, she steps off the bus, unable to afford a cab. Old enough to be fucked but not old enough or enough of a concern to find help when she needs it the most.
To get the last ditch help she walks into a sea of her lifelong neighbors she called friend, mentor, protector, who scream at her that she should kill herself and not her child! That her actions will keep her out of the one place she was fooled into believing she ever had a chance at getting into.
This innocent child, alone in the World is forced into aborting a child only a few years after playing with dolls meant to simulate what is coming.
It's a huge World and if your facts are based only on what someone told you which you didn't find out for yourself you are hedging all bets on something you had no choice in.
Make sure your choices are wise ones and that doctrine you follow is 100% your view of right and wrong. Anything that forces space between you and everyone else is not a worthy, holy nor moral one.

algebe's picture
@wgusapukc: Not only are

@wgusapukc: Not only are facts subjective and change at whim

Unless you live in the world of "1984", things that are subjective and change at whim are not facts. Obviously nobody can check every piece of knowledge directly through observation and analysis, but it's reasonable and valid to accept knowledge as factual based on the reputation of the person or publication that provided it, together with corroboration from other sources.

Superlatives based on qualitative comparisons are of course outside of the the realm of facts. "The greatest president", "the cleverest person", "the one true god" or the "best country" are all opinions and can neither be proved nor disproved.

wgusapukc's picture
Excellent, thanks for

Excellent, thanks for continuing the conversation.

FACTS should be not subjective but they absolutely are for to me it is TRUE, fact and to you it is false.

We are not logical critters and though we feel that what we KNOW what is right, true or a fact it is 100% subjective.
If you believe that lizards are running the World whether you have evidence proving or disproving this it is either fact or not fact to you personally.
"FIRE IS HOT" is true comparative to our experience, you put your hand into it and you can feel the heat. But if another fire is say twice as hot it actually makes the first comparatively "COLD".
Thanks for your opinion,

Good luck out there

algebe's picture


Again, "fire is hot" is a factual observation that the temperature of a flame is sufficient to cause us discomfort or pain. It's a fact obtained through our nervous systems. In addition, any number of people could confirm that observation by sticking their hands in the flame. "Twice as hot" would require instruments to confirm, though from past experience I would conclude that a sharp blue flame is likely to be much hotter than a wavy yellow one. Either way, it's a fact that can easily be confirmed scientifically.

Without evidence, "lizards ruling the world" is a belief or a delusion, not a fact. The same is true of all religions.

Sapporo's picture
The simple fact is, owning a

The simple fact is, owning a gun increases your chances of being killed accidentally by yourself or others,and of being killed deliberately by yourself or others. Further, owning a gun increases your chances of being murdered more than purely via guns. So what's the point of owning a gun?

The United States is about the most violent country in the Western world. To say that certain types of gun deaths don't count is horseshit. Other countries are able to cope without their police force going round killing off their population in such high numbers in what Cognostic calls "legal gun deaths". Other countries are able to have lower levels of suicide and homicide too, which I don't really see why I need to say why that's a good thing but apparently some people think that's okay as long as you get killed by someone you know.

Sky Pilot's picture


"The United States is about the most violent country in the Western world."

The reason for that violence is because it's a cultural thing based upon the Protestant religion and racism. The religious idea is that all sins will be forgiven so blowing someone's brains out isn't that big of a deal, especially when everyone will be resurrected. The racism idea is that white people are fulfilling manifest destiny by subjugating the Indians and black people. It's all related to the First Commandment.

wgusapukc's picture
Good point Diotrephers,

Good point Diotrephers,
But is wasn't the protestants or any religion at all but all of them, To say x is better than y it automatically makes you feel good inside about your perceived intelligent decision, but if I say x is right that means not only are all not in the clique whatever it may be that immediately not just makes you feel good but it makes you feel that all else are unintelligent. Now when you say all else are wrong and to prove that the 10 commandments is true break number 5 and show them how wrong they are.
It's the derision such comparative statements breed that is the true problem with religion.
If someone said, "hey, we don't know if this is right but I believe it has validity, mind if I sit down and tell you about love" would be a good and moral approach within seeking converts in waiting.
The trouble is that every organized, whether religious, civic, cultural, though it is to celebrate themselves/a point of view/a people and show how far they have come, by the fact not everyone is included automatically makes it a fit in as better than. But, though important and all equally, factually, TRUE, the problem is they see that what is currently right for them will not be the same in anyone around them, even when all pray to the same set of characters based on a single book. All have different facts that make them do what they do the way the do them and the facts are that, to them at that moment in time true, fact.
So to be asked "do you believe in jebus?"
If your answer is anything other than one taking into account not their stupidity, low IQ, color, freakin' socks, and punctuate this with. "I'm a fucking atheist, you stupid, misguided, unintelligent, questionable taste in socks having piece of shit!"
Though it will feel good and vindicating, you might even get a blast of Oxytocin for your troubles but all your celebrating is your own inequality. Your own inability to see that the facts that sit in your brain box, which again are 100% true to you in that moment of contact with your enemy. But our minds and so facts are completely fluid. No mater your ability to speak, walk, explain your own blood flow below the microscopic level or fly a plane, if ANYTHING, either proves it's self as wrong or you were in a place free enough of the blinding Adrenaline ebbed long enough go give your higher brain a go, they, these facts we live by, will change.
To use your higher brain to hear someone else's opinion, no matter how "crazy" to your set of facts they are is extremely important.
Look big, hard and often, great points,

Good luck out there.
You, them, everyone equipped with more than a reptilian brain
This just like guns or having limits to your perceived Liberties and Freedoms

sodette's picture
I like many of the

I like many of the conversations on Atheist Republic but sometimes, just sometimes, the conversations get way off course, very strangely, well... strange and often, unfortunately, ignorant in nature.

Simplify this issue, in my opinion...

~ I like guns.
~ I live in America.
~ I should be vetted to make sure I should have a right to own a gun (or guns) just like I have to be vetted and qualified to drink, drive or operate heavy equipment, get a tattoo (I don't agree with this one actually), etc.
~ I should have the right to own guns... any kind of gun, not just a gun approved by the government, state or my neighbors.
~ I should be held accountable for what I do with my guns.
~ Criminals should have their guns taken away - as well as other rights.
~ Gun manufacturers should be allowed to exist and prosper - by selling their guns to those who want them and qualify to own them.

If you don't like having the freedom to do what you want, believe what you choose, act how you act, think what you think, say what you say, own your own own guns if you want - etc., move to a place that doesn't let you decide these things for yourself.

I don't get it... if you don't want guns - don't buy them. If you don't like the idea of a person getting in his car and driving through an audience of people - either don't stand where a car can hit you or - what? Take away cars and licenses in America?

Nothing is easy, nothing is simple. But imposing your own personal flavor of right or wrong upon others is not preferred, in my opinion.

Seat belts in cars, helmets for motorcycle riders being mandatory - who has the right to tell me I have to wear these things and why?

What kind of sex I can or cannot have... what religion I must believe or participate in, what kind of car I am allowed to have and drive, etc. All personal choices, should not be governed by laws or society at large, should they?

There are arguments that show where everyone owning a gun and being trained to have one (Switzerland) makes for a safer community than an unarmed society - I'm not so sure that is correct. However, what I do believe is that once we start going down these roads of telling people what they are allowed to express, own, do, think, believe, have, etc. we are moving in the wrong direction.

If drugs are more dangerous than guns - and statistically more people die each year from legal and illegal drugs than guns have probably killed in all of history... then why are drugs not a more critical topic - especially psychotic or anti-phychotic or depression drugs which seem to have played a huge part in many of the shootings people claim guns were responsible for causing.... take guns away from people and they'll use knives, cars, bombs (homemade), poison, fists, bows and arrows, baseball bats, whatever - crazy people will do crazy things but people who think rationally are usually not a risk... even with guns. People on drugs.. well, that's a different subject, isn't it?

I'm sure I'll get problems from my comments - but I'm not willing to jump on ignorant bandwagons because they are popular... especially when they are more complex than is presented. This, like all issues, is not simple.

Most things in life are not black or white but exist in the gray areas... there are exceptions pro and con for everything. The older I get, the more I understand there is no definitive position on anything, or few things anyway (there is no credible evidence god exists, that's pretty definitive, but even as definitive as that is - people fight it like their lives depended upon it to try and prove, unsuccessfully, otherwise.).

Make a case for why I should not have a right to own a gun if I want to in America. Make a case why government should get my rights to decide for myself what is best for me and my family on a myriad of topics. Make a case for how you can eliminate violence in society from idiots....

Gray... life is lived in the gray.

wgusapukc's picture
Great job,

Great job,
"Make a case for why I should not have a right to own a gun if I want to in America. Make a case why government should get my rights to decide for myself what is best for me and my family on a myriad of topics. Make a case for how you can eliminate violence in society from idiots...."
The freedom to own a gun is great if your reason is valid. But to say I need a gun to protect against the people who have the freedom to own a gun you are not living freely.
Try instead to not look at the people around you as "IDIOTS" or in anyway different than you. Are you an "IDIOT", per you words it appears you have received some amount of Education physical and mental and you seem to have an cogent argument, but if you refer to the people around you in anyway shape or form as "IDIOTS" I am afraid you prove that the answer is "yes".
If you think Hawking, Mao, or everyone around you is either smart or an "Idiot" you are completely unobservant and unable to fathom even the smallest part of the the concept of intelligence. Are you smart? Yes, you are and may well change all of life around you. Are you stupid? If you want to look at the World/society in a myopic way, than yes you are also equally stupid.
Because you know Pi to 1,000 digits doesn't mean you know how to speak Hindi, yet a 2 year old can beat you, or that you can skateboard. You, just like every "idiot" around you are equally impressive, "intelligent" and equally "stupid".
You talked about seeing the gray and yet your logic is all black and white. Based solely on how it effects you and how it fits into your perceived "knowledge" of freedom.
Good points,
Good luck out there

sodette's picture


You misread my comment so I'll rephrase it for you:

I wrote "... Make a case for how you can eliminate violence in society from idiots..." and that is how it should be stated but, for your benefit, let me rewrite that so you are not confused, like you obviously are, from my comment.

Try this "Make a case for how you can eliminate violence in society, especially from idiots."

Or this "Make a case for how you can eliminate violence in society, especially from idiots who want to commit violence."

Or this "Make a case for how you can eliminate violence in society, especially from idiots who are prone to commit violence."

I did not state that society is idiots... that was a complete misunderstanding of my statement on your part perhaps due to my lack of clarity in phrasing my comment.

You stated: "The freedom to own a gun is great if your reason is valid. But to say I need a gun to protect against the people who have the freedom to own a gun you are not living freely."

To which I can only reply... freedom to own a gun should not be a right, it should be a privilege - like a driver's license, in my opinion. If those who own guns seem reasonable, rational, responsible, etc. and you feel threatened by that, it seems to me that the problem isn't the gun owners but yours.

That's the same logic people use when a person is gay living next door - or a different political persuasion or a person who has tattoos or a myriad of other things that make them uncomfortable. If you get to decide how I live my life because it makes you uncomfortable, I'm living in the wrong place. Your opinions and preferences have no bearing on how I live my life - provided I'm not causing harm or infringing on your freedoms to do the same - live your life how you choose.

Me, for instance, owning a gun, should not make you uncomfortable - in fact, having me as a neighbor should make you sleep even better at night knowing I'm fully capable as a martial artist, owner of guns (plural), and have a cell phone with several police officers (my friends) available at a moments notice.

Does this mean one or more gun owners won't go "postal" and use their guns to harm others? Nope. Welcome to freedom. Just like America can't outlaw Islam (or any other religion) doesn't mean the one living next door isn't going to attach a bomb to himself and take out your children at the bus stop.

You can't give your freedoms away just because you are afraid. Doing so gives power to those who want this kind of thinking and, if you start going down this road, deciding which items people should be free to express you'll soon end up crossing lines into other personal choices like what clothes can be worn, what foods can be eaten, what music can be listened to, what activities can be participated in, what religion one MUST practice and what rules must be followed for everything from sex to prayer... oh, wait... I believe there are societies who do all of this already - THEOCRATIC.

I am alive and should have my personal freedoms... provided I do no harm to others. Owning guns to protect myself and my family from, yes, idiots... or zealots or fundamentalists or crazy people or crazy ex's or thieves or whoever... should be one of my personal privileges, if I so choose - in my opinion.

And finally, you commented: "You talked about seeing the gray and yet your logic is all black and white. Based solely on how it effects you and how it fits into your perceived "knowledge" of freedom."

Let me state in reply:

Yes, life is lived in the gray areas, most of it anyway. What is right for one person may not be correct for another (for instance, I love motorcycles, Harley's in particular... some people do not - does that make motorcycles wrong? Because motorcycles are dangerous - to those people - does that mean I should not have the right or freedom to ride one myself if I choose?).

Yes, my statements were solely and 100% based on how this issue fits into my life, affects my freedom to live my life how I choose, my understanding, experience and knowledge of how life should be lived... all, as opinion and subjective perspectives, you are correct. I am not trying to enforce my ideals upon you, but I am only giving an opinion and perspective - for discussion.

I only asked that you make a case for how I do not think correctly, which you did not. But with regard to your criticism of my views I only ask - "And your point is?"

wgusapukc's picture
Excellent work,

Excellent work,
I want to talk about Freedom which you brought up. If I have the freedom to have a gun but that freedom impedes the freedom of the person you kill than your right, "freedom" isn't a freedom it is potentially lethally against the freedom of your victim.
You need to understand that the freedom that you enjoy was as the result of the deaths of very many people who chose to give their life to their perceived problem.
Adding lead to gas increased our freedom to safely move around our World. But lead isn't freedom nor the way because all the possibilities of it weren't well enough evaluated.
I have no problem with the freedom of having or not having a gun, but if that freedom is so caustic to me that it builds a situation where I NEED to buy a gun in order to try to protect my perceived freedom than no one is free. No has FREEDOM.
THere is no black and white to this situation, you need to look into the gray areas surrounding your concept of FREEDOM and ensure you aren't removing someone else's.
We live in a society of millions or billions that want freedom and yet the fact of on a whim you can pick up a blue light special assault rifle and all the ammo you want. That, if you feel is freedom you profoundly need to reevaluate what FREEDOM actually means and not just your opinion of the word.

Good luck out there

sodette's picture


Who said freedom was pretty, easy, free of risk, peaceful, altruistic, kind or anything else? Freedom isn't some kind of paradise, in fact, freedom comes with a lot of animosity and challenges.

Freedom means neither you nor anyone else gets to force me into a belief box not of my own choosing. This means there will be a lot of dissent among a free society because there will be a myriad of different beliefs people CHOOSE to hold - or avoid. Different doesn't make for peaceful often. In fact, I find different tends to cause division.

Just because you may not be comfortable with my life choices doesn't make them right or wrong - doesn't make you right or wrong. My life choices don't have anything to do with you - they are mine, for me. In a free society, you don't have the right to tell me what my life choices should be, you don't get to dictate my freedom.

If I buy a gun and you feel the need to buy a gun because of that - is that my problem?

Freedom is not easy. Freedom is not peace. Freedom is frustrating. Freedom is preferred over any other option, in my opinion.

Are there limits that should be imposed upon a free society, free people? Of course there are... we live in a society, a world where what we do affects others.

If my neighbor wants to build a nuclear bomb, I doubt very seriously if he's going squirrel hunting with it or that he is going to use it to protect his family from a thief. I kinda question his motives, you know? What he is doing could really go wrong... in a very bad way. I am concerned.

If he wants to own a gun, should he be able to buy a semiautomatic rifle? I don't know... not sure about that one. If he lives in some areas of the US, I'd say maybe. However, if you look at the other side of the argument and allow government to take away the freedom to own guns at all or give you permission to only own a pellet gun or bb gun or 22 pistol with only one bullet at a time in it.. etc., you begin to see the frustration and complicated nature of issues like this.

Freedom comes with a price. You don't get to live in a world of your choosing where everyone believes, thinks or does exactly like you approve.

Still, given my choice, personally, subjectively - I'll take my freedom over enslavement to anyone else's idea of what is best for me any day and I'll gladly give my neighbor the same rights knowing we may not agree or get along.

I don't need luck, thank you very much... she's another god and frankly, I'm fine all by myself.

Tin-Man's picture
Well said, Dragon.

Well said, Dragon.

LogicFTW's picture
@everyone interested:

@everyone interested:

I always enjoy debating about guns and there are lots of comments here I want to add to. Instead of flooding this thread with replies I will just post my stance on guns here. Feel free to reply with your own thoughts or arguments.

TLDR: There are already lots of gun regulation in place for many types of firearms especially ones commonly used in warfare, why not extend that to all guns that have little practical use outside of warzones and are mostly designed for warfare? Taking it a step further, why not regulate and control all firearms designed to kill to at least the minimal level of regulation and control on cars on public roads?

I do not like guns. I feel most reasonable people should not like guns. Guns first and foremost are designed to kill, very easily from range with a simple pull of a trigger. Even those in law enforcement, or other duties that requires the use of guns I feel should not like guns, (perhaps rightly, even more so, as guns represent a daily major threat to their lives.) Guns are an enormous responsibility to have. And a vast majority of people have no real valid reason to own any type of gun.

That said, I do believe in rights. If I, as a responsible law abiding citizen want a gun for something legitimate, even if it is just to shoot at targets as a sport, I should be allowed to have a gun that does so within reason. Sure, tightly control and regulate it, make it as safe as possible, but yeah let's not completely ban all guns from everyone, that is not needed. Plus banning all guns w/o removing the 300 million guns in already in circulation will have no real effect or even create a negative, undesirable effect. And I fully agree removing the 300 million guns already in circulation will be a near impossible task.

However: "gun right activist" have been spooked, by the gun lobby into a boogeyman that is not there. Almost no one is calling for outright ban of all guns across the nation. What people are asking for is sensible gun control. Just like there already are lots of gun regulation in place for certain kinds of firearms. You need lots of special permission to buy and own a minigun. It is not out right banned in any country or state. Guess what? The regulation works! When is the last time you heard of a mass shooting of any kind involving a mini gun? How many people per year get killed by miniguns in the US? My guess: near zero since the strong control and regulation went into place.

To the gun right activist that are resistant to the idea of any sensible gun control, ask yourself:
"why is it that C4, dynamite, fully automatic guns, grenades, and so on, are so tightly regulated? There are quite a few answers to that, but it mostly boils down to they are highly dangerous, and one needs to show a real need, (usually for work,) and demonstrate the level of responsibility of owning such dangerous tools. More than anything, there is powerful reasons to control and limit access to these types of dangerous tools, that such dangerous objects if unregulated can fall into hands of people that are not responsible or worse, people that will plan harm with them.

Back to the idea of better gun regulation: again a vast majority of people are not calling for outright ban of guns. Just more sensible control of guns, especially certain types of guns. There are certain types of firearms that can be described much the same as a fully automatic machine gun, huge ammo clips, high rate of fire, fast reload, and ultimately designed very close to weapons of war. Modify them with bump stock triggers, large ammo clips and you essentially have a weapon of war, a way to easily kill lots of people with overwhelming firepower that requires little training in using effectively. The kind of firepower in the hands of a suicidal deranged person that even trained people in the use of handguns, (police officers,) will realize they are quickly badly tactically outmatched.

Additionally there is no legitimate use for a civilian to have a gun with such fire power. It is highly inefficient for hunting, it is much less effective for civilian self defense then a handgun or other even more effective methods of self protection. Blowing shit up with a powerful firearm can be fun, but it is much more practical to go to a firing range and rent said gun then to own one. There are some tournaments/sport that incorporates guns like the AR-15 but none that i know of that have large magazines and bump stock triggers.

Some crackpots like to mention as a reason for these types of guns: to defend themselves from a big corrupt government. Yeah, that crackpot and a couple of buddies with ar-15's is really going to even last even 2 seconds against a US government, that control of the most powerful military the world has ever seen, by far! It is only public relations considerations that would stop the US government from wiping these kind of people and all their buddies out, no matter, how many, and what type of guns these crackpots have, in 2 seconds via a drone dropping a missile where the "anti government resistance crew" is hanging out. They will never even see or hear drone with the missle coming, they would not even get a single shot off from their fancy warfare designed guns.

Instead, somehow, we find ourselves in a situation in the US where guns are so unregulated, it would be a simple matter for someone with the cash to get ahold of powerful warfare designed weapons that makes mass shootings as easy as pulling a trigger. There is nothing stopping me or the salesman from buying or selling a firearm designed closely to the one used in war 2nd hand. Regulation on guns are so lack that it is far easier to buy guns in the US and smuggle them to Mexico! There is far less regulation for this sort of killing machine then for buying a car, a tool designed with the intent to transport people and their things. Additionally it is a simple matter to further modify the gun increasing its lethality exponentially, just like the vegas shooter did. How many people would of the vegas shoot killed if he was limited to 2 basic hand guns for self defense and perhaps a hunting rifle I can already tell you it would not be 58, let alone the hundreds of others that got injured.

Furthering and improving gun control and regulation nationwide only makes logical sense. Those that argue otherwise are only being irrational as it is an indefensible position rationally.


Donating = Loving

Heart Icon

Bringing you atheist articles and building active godless communities takes hundreds of hours and resources each month. If you find any joy or stimulation at Atheist Republic, please consider becoming a Supporting Member with a recurring monthly donation of your choosing, between a cup of tea and a good dinner.

Or make a one-time donation in any amount.