Hacker News Reader

Comment by smallmancontrov | Hacker News Reader

No, the fact that people occasionally get hurt by accident with fireworks does not make the violent subtext in "attacking a government building with explosives" a correct description of the situation.

View on HN

So you admit that fireworks are known to cause death and severe bodily harm. What sort of prison sentence would be appropriate for attacking people with such devices?

Suppose I am setting off some fireworks in my street to celebrate the 4th. Do you believe that my neighbors should fear for their lives? This was a noise protest. They weren't shooting roman candles at people.

Water is known to cause death and serious harm.

And people who use water intentionally to cause death or serious harm should face harsh legal consequences.

In fact, let's use your argument. People drown accidentally in swimming pools regularly. So then if some "protester" decided to set up one of those portable pools and forcibly hold people down under water in one, wouldn't they be guilty of attempted murder?

Using things that are known to cause death and serious harm in a way that is intended to cause death and serious harm is in fact the thing I'm against.

That's why drowning somebody or attempting to drown somebody is a crime. Just like using fireworks as a weapon against somebody.

I'm having trouble believing this comment chain is happening/neccesary. I feel completely disconnected from the thought process of a large portion of society.

If only you were normal.

You can’t drown someone with fireworks.

You can't drown somebody with a gun either.

Super soaker? Checkmate atheist!

So you admit that you were making a nonsense argument. Thanks for your honesty!

Nope, fireworks are still explosives and they can cause death and severe bodily harm. Where’s the nonsense?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com