> I think "If they tried stabbing people in Texas they’d have been shot." was the most important part in the comment.

It is a cherry picked example and has nothing to contribute to the overall argument that gun ownership makes the US safe. Otherwise I can point to the many mass shootings in the US and say that would never have happened in the UK.

I live in the UK. It is objectively safer to live in the UK where we are not allowed to own guns. To us, it is absurd to claim we need guns to be safer when we look at what actually happens in the US as a result of guns.

I don't think this is really a controversial take.

That is why the argument for gun ownership actually happens at a deeper level in the psyche.

▲

johnisgood a day ago | parent | next [-]

It is not a cherry-picked example at all. That is the essence of the mentality. It is used as a deterrent. If people (thieves, criminals) think "this guy may have a gun", then others are less likely to rob him to avoid getting shot.

I do not think it is that difficult to grasp either. Do you understand now?

I am Eastern European, no guns here either, and as I said, it may not universally apply to all countries, or even cities within one country.

▲

munksbeer a day ago | parent [-]

> I do not think it is that difficult to grasp either. Do you understand now?

Sure, I can read English, I can understand the actual English words you're typing and the point you're trying to make. I just think it isn't true, and an honest reading of statistics would show that.

But I don't think we're going to get honesty here.

	▲	johnisgood a day ago \| parent [-]
		You want statistics? Check out https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45240145. This does not imply what I said though, it just confirms that more guns does not imply more gun violence. You did not leave an answer to "If people (thieves, criminals) think "this guy may have a gun", then others are less likely to rob him to avoid getting shot." though. You wanted to know the mentality behind it, and this is the mentality behind it, so now you know why people say and believe these things. As I previously have said, this probably cannot be universally applied to all countries, but it theoretically could be, especially if we consider the fact that "more guns -> more gun violence" is just simply not true. I have a feeling it is a cultural thing. How come Serbia (among other countries) have lots of guns yet no firearm-related violence? Many other countries have much less guns per 100 people (as per statistics), yet gun violence is through the roof. We have to look at it from many different aspects. We need ask ourselves "why?" or "why that is?", what are the differences? What are the cultural differences? Just to be sure, I am not in favor of guns, but I do believe in that guns can be a deterrent in some places at the very least, and we know that more guns do not lead to more firearm-related homicides, so theoretically it could work in some or many places. I do not know much about Serbia. I wonder how come they have lots of guns yet barely any related crimes.

▲

a day ago | parent | prev | next [-]

[deleted]

▲

nailer a day ago | parent | prev [-]

> It is a cherry picked example and has nothing to contribute to the overall argument that gun ownership makes the US safe.

It obviously makes the argument that Texas isn’t New York or London and has little street crime, as a result of gun ownership. You wanted to understand the mentality? That’s the mentality. No road men in Austin.

> Otherwise I can point to the many mass shootings in the US and say that would never have happened in the UK.

Yes you can. That’s a fine argument, I agree with it. I’ve made comments about not wanting to die because someone had a bad day earlier in this thread supporting exactly this argument. You’re arguing with someone else rather than reading my responses.