• Buelldozer@lemmy.today
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    19
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    edit-2
    9 months ago

    Why did you gender that?

    In answer to your question I’ll say “It would depend on the circumstances.” A weapon retrieved from a nightstand, or a mothers purse, and used by a small child to kill themselves is a very different situation than a teen who accesses a gun safe without permission.

    • laverabe@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      Honestly pepper spray and bear spray are 100x more effective than a gun in most situations. The intent is usually to disable not to kill, and pepper spray eliminates a need to have any serious hesitation. That 0.5 second hesitation about whether to take a life with a gun could mean life or death in a defense scenario.

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

      Why did you gender that?

      Why did it upset you?

      A weapon retrieved from a nightstand, or a mothers purse, and used by a small child to kill themselves is a very different situation than a teen who accesses a gun safe without permission.

      Both are a failure to prevent a child from accessing a firearm.

      • Buelldozer@lemmy.today
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        9 months ago

        Why did it upset you?

        Because it’s unnecessary.

        This and this are both failures; gendering the failing parent simply isn’t required.

        Both are a failure to prevent a child from accessing a firearm.

        Yes but they are only similar in the broadest sense; a child grabbing a loaded gun out of Mom’s Purse or Dad’s Nightstand are very different scenarios from a teen who destructively opens a gun safe or steals the key to it.

        Safe storage for firearms is desirable but requiring the prosecution of those who made a good faith effort and failed is not.

        • PoliticalAgitator@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          9 months ago

          Because it’s unnecessary.

          Damn well wait until you find out how many gun deaths are unnecessary.

          Safe storage for firearms is desirable but requiring the prosecution of those who made a good faith effort and failed is not.

          Then that prosecution can determine if a good faith effort was made or if the parents were negligent with the storage of their firearms, rather than the usual pro-gun stance of “every solution must be 100% effective (except ours) while never even mildly inconveniencing us and if you try and make it actually happen we’ll kill you”.