Yes, you’re right everything can cause serious harm or kill, but certain things are designed to harm or kill, or designed to look like something that could harm or kill.
Context is a big factor here. A person holding a 6 inch knife in a kitchen? No one is going to bat an eye. They’re probably using that knife to prep vegetables. Same knife, same person but they are walking around a market/playground/movie theatre? Suddenly it’s a very different situation and context.
Is that stranger with the knife safe? I don’t know, but I do know that I don’t have anything to defend myself aside from what is around me if they ARE NOT a safe person.
And how come the crazies exist nonetheless and do all that kind of stuff somewhat independently of other people being armed?
Also, these same crazies, in other countries, tend to be unarmed (besides kitchen weapons). Would you prefer to defend against one with a gun or one with a knife?
If someone in those countries is caught in shady circumstances carrying any sort of substantial blade, that person is in trouble. If someone in a “freedom country” is caught carrying a gun under the same shady circumstances, that person walks free as that’s not illegal by itself.
And how come the crazies exist nonetheless and do all that kind of stuff somewhat independently of other people being armed?
A mix of mental health issues and standard human nature.
Would you prefer to defend against one with a gun or one with a knife?
One with a knife. But my preference of enemy arms does not negate that enemy’s right to defend themself with a gun. I’d also prefer that no one ever hurt anyone else, but my preference there cannot be guaranteed.
I’m not so sure that standard human nature is that prevalent in some countries, independently of guns.
In Switzerland everyone has guns and weirdos are not much of a thing. People aren’t even carrying them. It would be a weirdo has gun Vs you have no gun. However, given that it is publicly known that any misuse of the said guns is gravely punished (and that they treat properly people with mental health issues) that’s not a common thing.
You say you prefer relatively less armed weirdos. However prefer the solution where both of you can have lethal weapons and have to provide no justification whatsoever to carry them.
You: “Mr. officer, That hat guy, he tried to assault me, he has a gun”.
Off: “Did you?”.
Guy: “Nope”.
Off: “Do you have any proof or witnesses?”.
You: “Nope”.
Off: “Both free to go”
In a no-guns country it goes like
You: “Mr. officer, That hat guy, he tried to assault me, he has a knife”.
Off: [checks for knife]
“Come with me”
Can’t pretty much everything around you cause serious harm or kill??? I don’t understand this stance.
Yes, you’re right everything can cause serious harm or kill, but certain things are designed to harm or kill, or designed to look like something that could harm or kill.
Context is a big factor here. A person holding a 6 inch knife in a kitchen? No one is going to bat an eye. They’re probably using that knife to prep vegetables. Same knife, same person but they are walking around a market/playground/movie theatre? Suddenly it’s a very different situation and context.
Is that stranger with the knife safe? I don’t know, but I do know that I don’t have anything to defend myself aside from what is around me if they ARE NOT a safe person.
There is nothing wrong with running around swinging knives simply because you want to. That’s just freedom, and it’s ok.
So instead of arming yourself, you’re trying to disarm the rest of the world? Why take that difficult path instead of the easy way?
Public safety.
Yeah no wonder America is a lost cause in terms of violence. How or why would anyone arm themselves when they’re already in a public place?
To protect yourself and others from crazies. Because crazies can and will use anything and everything as a weapon.
And how come the crazies exist nonetheless and do all that kind of stuff somewhat independently of other people being armed?
Also, these same crazies, in other countries, tend to be unarmed (besides kitchen weapons). Would you prefer to defend against one with a gun or one with a knife?
If someone in those countries is caught in shady circumstances carrying any sort of substantial blade, that person is in trouble. If someone in a “freedom country” is caught carrying a gun under the same shady circumstances, that person walks free as that’s not illegal by itself.
A mix of mental health issues and standard human nature.
One with a knife. But my preference of enemy arms does not negate that enemy’s right to defend themself with a gun. I’d also prefer that no one ever hurt anyone else, but my preference there cannot be guaranteed.
And yes, correct, in the USA we can have guns.
I’m not so sure that standard human nature is that prevalent in some countries, independently of guns.
In Switzerland everyone has guns and weirdos are not much of a thing. People aren’t even carrying them. It would be a weirdo has gun Vs you have no gun. However, given that it is publicly known that any misuse of the said guns is gravely punished (and that they treat properly people with mental health issues) that’s not a common thing.
You say you prefer relatively less armed weirdos. However prefer the solution where both of you can have lethal weapons and have to provide no justification whatsoever to carry them.
You: “Mr. officer, That hat guy, he tried to assault me, he has a gun”.
Off: “Did you?”.
Guy: “Nope”.
Off: “Do you have any proof or witnesses?”.
You: “Nope”.
Off: “Both free to go”
In a no-guns country it goes like You: “Mr. officer, That hat guy, he tried to assault me, he has a knife”.
Off: [checks for knife] “Come with me”
I agree with the first two paragraphs. USA is going down the shitter in dealing with crazies.
I understand the point you’re attempting with the rest of your comment but I disagree it’s a plausible scenario or problem.