• capital@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      And without one, the stronger will always prevail over the weak. I can’t believe I need to spell this out.

        • capital@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          Me.

          And my wife, and daughter. People that, without the use of arms, will always be the weaker given it’s usually men who commit these crimes.

          You’re missing the point - this tool takes physical strength out of the equation for self defense purposes and you’re acting like it’s a bad thing.

          • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            2 months ago

            Ah, so what you mean is that it’s okay for the strong to take advantage of the weak when you’re the strong one.

            • capital@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              2 months ago

              Please define “take advantage of” in your comment. The entirety of my comments here have been in a self defense context. I don’t see how my owning and carrying a gun means I’m “taking advantage of” anyone.

              • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                2 months ago

                Interesting how you want me to define terms but haven’t defined them yourself.

                You haven’t defined “the strong” or “the weak” or what you mean by “self-defense.”

                Maybe start defining your terms first before you demand it of others.

                • capital@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  2 months ago

                  You’re shitting me, right?

                  In this thread where I describe my fucked up back, rating from the VA, my inability to win fistfights, my worry about my wife and daughter defending themselves from men. And you can’t figure out what I mean by “strong” and “weak”. Bullshit. But fuck it, let’s do this.

                  You haven’t defined “the strong” or “the weak”

                  Both of these are used to describe ones physical prowess in relation to the other. They’re relative. Someone “stronger” than me can overpower me through physical means and I would be helpless to defend against it, given no other tools.

                  or what you mean by “self-defense.”

                  I’ll just go with the dictionary on this one:

                  the act of defending oneself, one’s property, or a close relative

                  Now feel free to explain what you mean by “take advantage of” in the context of my using a gun to defend myself.

                  Edit: I just fucking knew I would go as far as to define these well-known words to get nothing in return. You can tell it was going that way this whole exchange.

                  • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    ·
                    2 months ago

                    Sorry, not good enough definitions.

                    A starving man on death’s door manages to break into your home to steal a loaf of bread. You have a gun and see him do it.

                    Who is the strong one and who is the weak one there? Who is acting in self-defense there?

                    And I am happy to explain that if you shot and killed the man in that situation, you would be taking advantage of their weakness.

            • intensely_human@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              2 months ago

              No he’s saying that weapons permit people to be equally strong.

              Without weapons, big people get to control smaller people. With weapons, a person gets to modify their own susceptibility to being controlled.

              I’m guessing you’re a rather large person if you don’t understand this.

              • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                4
                ·
                2 months ago

                And yet they said they would shoot a starving person breaking into their home to steal a loaf of bread. That doesn’t sound like ‘equally strong’ to me.