On Tuesday a Dutch court sentenced the programmer Alexey Pertsev to five years in prison. The court found him guilty of money laundering because the "Tornado Cash" software he developed enables criminals to carry out completely anonymous and untraceable crypto transactions (so-called "crypto mixer")
They’re not necessarily made for killing. Most people defending themself with a pistol (whose only purpose is for shooting humans) would not want to shoot for the head or chest
No, guns are tools designed specifically for killing. They have no use as defense if they can’t kill. They’re not shields. You also can’t hammer a nail with a gun, or cut a steak with a gun.
The fuck? Vets do much, much more than just euthanize animals. What do guns do other than shoot projectiles intended to kill?
How do guns defend without using the threat of violence? How do they act as a physical shield?
Yes, it’s possible to practice using tools designed specifically for killing. Cars are tools designed specifically for transport, and people have contests for driving those, too.
Why is it so hard for you to accept that guns are tools designed specifically for killing? That’s literally just what they are.
The fuck? Vets do much, much more than just euthanize animals. What do guns do other than shoot projectiles intended to kill?
Just using your silly logic…you know vets have captive bolt guns and suppressed firearms as well, does that make their tools pointless because they only kill?
How do guns defend without using the threat of violence? How do they act as a physical shield?
Same way a sword or knife can be used to kill and also defend, its a force multiplier.
Yes, it’s possible to practice using tools designed specifically for killing. Cars are tools designed specifically for transport, and people have contests for driving those, too.
Glad you’re grasping it
Why is it so hard for you to accept that guns are tools designed specifically for killing? That’s literally just what they are.
Because I’m not the one that suggests magically thinking banning them all will make the world a safer place. Do you think the 100lb woman can defend against a 250lb man? Or what about minorities who are threated by a few racist fucks? Or an LGBTQ+ person who has a bunch of bigots trying to kill them? Should these people just not get a gun because it’s designed to kill? What tool do you suggest they use?
There’s very few products which everyone can objectively say are designed for killing.
Agreed, it’s very rare, guns are absolutely one of those things though. They’re the perfect evolution of the personal handheld killing tool. You just point it at the thing you want dead, push the button, and you’ve got a good chance of deadding it immediately with your first try.
Guns don’t have a secondary use, like how a knife can whittle a tree branch into a nice spoon, or cut some thread, or skin an animal. Guns cause massive damage to whatever they are pointed at, and sometimes to the things around that thing too, if you’re particularly unlucky.
They’re the solution to a problem when you need the solution to be “escalate this situation to 1000% and start killing stuff”.
Gun manufacturers who say they’re made for defence and not killing must be delusional or confused about what their products do, or just lying to their potential customers for… who even knows what reason.
They are made to defend yourself by killing the person you need to be defended from. Pure and simple. They are truly as cut and dry a tool for killing things as there is.
Nobody is out there shooting people defensively with some non-lethal mode built in to their high speed projectile metal lumps that tear through the human body, causing parts of it to explode and massive trauma to the surrounding tissues and organs.
Do guns exist that fire beanbags, or tranquilliser darts, or such? Absolutely, but none of us here are talking about those types of more specialist guns. We’re talking about your standard gun, the kind they sell to lots of civilians in countries like the USA.
They’re not necessarily made for killing. Most people defending themself with a pistol (whose only purpose is for shooting humans) would not want to shoot for the head or chest
Ah yes, I forgot that all pistols have a “wound only” setting.
Was tornado cash made for laundering money?
My point is that gun manufacturers will say they make their products for defense, not killing. Knife manufacturers, same. Hammer manufacturers, same.
There’s very few products which everyone can objectively say are designed for killing.
No, guns are tools designed specifically for killing. They have no use as defense if they can’t kill. They’re not shields. You also can’t hammer a nail with a gun, or cut a steak with a gun.
You can sport shoot with them, you can hunt for food with them, and every military uses them…for mainly defense.
How does hunting not involve killing?
How does such military defense not involve the act or threat of killing?
This is like saying veterinarians are killers with their tools because they euthanize animals…
Just having arms is a deterant, yes firearms are designed to destroy, they’re also designed as a defensive tool.
You clearly ignored sports shooting which is an actual sport, even an event in the Olympics.
The fuck? Vets do much, much more than just euthanize animals. What do guns do other than shoot projectiles intended to kill?
How do guns defend without using the threat of violence? How do they act as a physical shield?
Yes, it’s possible to practice using tools designed specifically for killing. Cars are tools designed specifically for transport, and people have contests for driving those, too.
Why is it so hard for you to accept that guns are tools designed specifically for killing? That’s literally just what they are.
Just using your silly logic…you know vets have captive bolt guns and suppressed firearms as well, does that make their tools pointless because they only kill?
Same way a sword or knife can be used to kill and also defend, its a force multiplier.
Glad you’re grasping it
Because I’m not the one that suggests magically thinking banning them all will make the world a safer place. Do you think the 100lb woman can defend against a 250lb man? Or what about minorities who are threated by a few racist fucks? Or an LGBTQ+ person who has a bunch of bigots trying to kill them? Should these people just not get a gun because it’s designed to kill? What tool do you suggest they use?
This. I guess people here aren’t familiar with skeet
Yes, and guns are one of them.
Agreed, it’s very rare, guns are absolutely one of those things though. They’re the perfect evolution of the personal handheld killing tool. You just point it at the thing you want dead, push the button, and you’ve got a good chance of deadding it immediately with your first try.
Guns don’t have a secondary use, like how a knife can whittle a tree branch into a nice spoon, or cut some thread, or skin an animal. Guns cause massive damage to whatever they are pointed at, and sometimes to the things around that thing too, if you’re particularly unlucky.
They’re the solution to a problem when you need the solution to be “escalate this situation to 1000% and start killing stuff”.
Gun manufacturers who say they’re made for defence and not killing must be delusional or confused about what their products do, or just lying to their potential customers for… who even knows what reason.
They are made to defend yourself by killing the person you need to be defended from. Pure and simple. They are truly as cut and dry a tool for killing things as there is.
Nobody is out there shooting people defensively with some non-lethal mode built in to their high speed projectile metal lumps that tear through the human body, causing parts of it to explode and massive trauma to the surrounding tissues and organs.
Do guns exist that fire beanbags, or tranquilliser darts, or such? Absolutely, but none of us here are talking about those types of more specialist guns. We’re talking about your standard gun, the kind they sell to lots of civilians in countries like the USA.
What do you think the first digital computer was invented for? Hint: it wasn’t world peace
I’m downvoting you, but only because you wrote “whose only purpose is for shooting humans”, which is false statement.
Really, you could have used better examples like brass knuckles, but no, you didn’t.