I’d guess every one of those people is on a domestic terrorism watchlist as “potential terrorists”. They’re all good guys and haven’t done anything illegal, but the feds don’t know that.
I’d guess every one of those people is on a domestic terrorism watchlist as “potential terrorists”. They’re all good guys and haven’t done anything illegal, but the feds don’t know that.
There are more guns in America than people. 99.99999% of guns will never be used in a crime. An American who buys a car is far more likely to hurt someone with their car than someone who buys a gun is to hurt someone with that gun.
Most gun owners use them to target shoot as a hobby, or hunt deer. Some people also consider them a supplement to locks on their doors as home protection.
I am way more likely to be hurt by a car - you’re right. The presence of cars in an environment puts me at an elevated threat level. When I’m standing waiting for a light I often try to make sure there is a pole between me and traffic.
But with very few exceptions, it’s hard for someone to bring a car into environments where I am not expecting them. Guns, not so much.
If you own a lockpicking set, i believe you when you say it’s for fun and learning - but to pretend owning it does nothing to the risk that you might unlock my front door is just denial.
> I hang out in libertarian circles
> They’re all good guys and haven’t done anything illegal
That said - raising the one single isolated case of a person with a gun helping to stop a mass shooting, while conveniently forgetting the hundreds of such attacks that have occurred in past couple of years is IMO pretty disgusting. If I were making the argument that gun ownership was not a cause for suspicion I'd be giving mass shootings an extremely wide berth.
And how do these people's preparations help in the event of a civil war?
>And how do these people's preparations help in the event of a civil war?
(scratching my head how they would not)