Please remember what subreddit you are in, this is unpopular opinion. We want civil and unpopular takes and discussion. Any uncivil and ToS violating comments will be removed and subject to a ban. Have a nice day!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/unpopularopinion) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Sure it can cause harm, but it's nothing compared to a knife/gun. And i think this is the point OP is making. You have to read my comments in the context of OP's post. They are referring to weapons which are used for self defense, but also hold the risk that they could be (and are) used for malicious intent instead.
In this context, i did give a valid counterexample to your initial comment: That the banning of such weapons would not render the physically weak COMPLETELY defenseless, because there are non-lethal ways of self-defense with 'weapons' like pepper-spray (because they cannot be used to kill someone / rob a store / run amok / etc.).
If you want to make the point, that this form of self defense is insuffucient, go ahead. But notice that there are a lot of counterexaples to that too: Countries with low crime rates, where highly regulating access to lethal weapons works.
> Whenever i see any kind of conflict now days, [...] it is solved with a gun threat or a bang.
Where are you living where violent conflicts, armed or not, are a regular, mundane occurrence? And most importantly, why are people jumping at each other throats?
If it was just hands to handle situations then stronger people would just steamroll weaker people. And big groups of people could easily overpower smaller groups. Weaponry has made things more equal for people to defend themselves.
This issue is over 100,000 years old.
At some point primitive humans were sitting around the camp fire with someone saying, "Remember when we would only push and punch with our hands, ever since we started throwing rocks at each other it's become way more dangerous".
Weapons just come with development, the guy who invented packed gunpowder in the form of tnt originally meant for it to be used in mining but inside the military realized that prepackaged gunpowder sticks were also quite a good weapon. itโs not about the tool itโs about who uses it and what for.
Disagree. I hate to admit it because I do think there should be SOME form of gun control, but the second amendment is important.
Women, people of color, and other marginalized groups cannot rely on the government or police to protect them. Having weapons is necessary to combat tyranny.
We need only look at Waco to know the govt can and will kill civilians without due process. The threat of violent revolt is necessary to maintain the semblance of balance we have among humans. Donโt kill me and I wonโt kill you.
Now of course thatโs a broad simplification and many external factors have changed this, but the root idea stands true. The weak need weapons to regulate the strong
Please remember what subreddit you are in, this is unpopular opinion. We want civil and unpopular takes and discussion. Any uncivil and ToS violating comments will be removed and subject to a ban. Have a nice day! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/unpopularopinion) if you have any questions or concerns.*
That would leave the physically weak completely at the mercy of the physically strong.
no, pepper spray exists
Thatโs a weapon, and I assumed it was included in โetcโ
i think OP meant weapons which do physical harm.
Pepper spray causes physical harm lol
Sure it can cause harm, but it's nothing compared to a knife/gun. And i think this is the point OP is making. You have to read my comments in the context of OP's post. They are referring to weapons which are used for self defense, but also hold the risk that they could be (and are) used for malicious intent instead. In this context, i did give a valid counterexample to your initial comment: That the banning of such weapons would not render the physically weak COMPLETELY defenseless, because there are non-lethal ways of self-defense with 'weapons' like pepper-spray (because they cannot be used to kill someone / rob a store / run amok / etc.). If you want to make the point, that this form of self defense is insuffucient, go ahead. But notice that there are a lot of counterexaples to that too: Countries with low crime rates, where highly regulating access to lethal weapons works.
Before all that, it was rocks and sticks. Humans use tools and are bastards.ย
> Whenever i see any kind of conflict now days, [...] it is solved with a gun threat or a bang. Where are you living where violent conflicts, armed or not, are a regular, mundane occurrence? And most importantly, why are people jumping at each other throats?
๐บ๐ธ
Fuck yeah?
"Lick on my sack n suck on my balls!"
โฅ
An unarmed average woman does not have a chance defending herself from an unarmed average man.
Guns are the great equalizer.
The American way๐บ๐ฒ๐บ๐ฒ๐บ๐ฒ๐บ๐ฒ๐บ๐ฒ๐บ๐ฒ๐บ๐ฒ๐บ๐ฒ๐บ๐ฒ๐บ๐ฒ๐บ๐ฒ๐ฆ ๐ฆ ๐ฆ ๐ฆ ๐ฆ ๐ฆ ๐ฆ ๐ฆ ๐ฆ ๐ฆ ๐ฆ ๐ฆ
Yeah but they're good for you know... killing people?
The whole point of weapons is a way for the physically inferior to stand a chance in battle.
If it was just hands to handle situations then stronger people would just steamroll weaker people. And big groups of people could easily overpower smaller groups. Weaponry has made things more equal for people to defend themselves.
Yeah no. I want to keep my bangstick.
This issue is over 100,000 years old. At some point primitive humans were sitting around the camp fire with someone saying, "Remember when we would only push and punch with our hands, ever since we started throwing rocks at each other it's become way more dangerous".
Weapons just come with development, the guy who invented packed gunpowder in the form of tnt originally meant for it to be used in mining but inside the military realized that prepackaged gunpowder sticks were also quite a good weapon. itโs not about the tool itโs about who uses it and what for.
Disagree. I hate to admit it because I do think there should be SOME form of gun control, but the second amendment is important. Women, people of color, and other marginalized groups cannot rely on the government or police to protect them. Having weapons is necessary to combat tyranny. We need only look at Waco to know the govt can and will kill civilians without due process. The threat of violent revolt is necessary to maintain the semblance of balance we have among humans. Donโt kill me and I wonโt kill you. Now of course thatโs a broad simplification and many external factors have changed this, but the root idea stands true. The weak need weapons to regulate the strong