Well the number one killer of human beings by objects is vehicles. Guns are next to last on the list.
Guns are a subject because it gives someone a right to so no. This contains major fear for the leftists and certain elements. Elements that want to take without earning. And those that want to make other human beings conform to their ideology and be good little producers.
When speaking of free will, it’s the ability to so no or to have the right to live by a different paradigm.
I don’t really do politics. It’s an abberated subject.
I just never vote for liberals. Never have. Never will.
Britain even tried making swords illegal and punishable by hanging and in some cases drawn and quartered. Obviously it didn’t work.
In these day and age, vehicles is a necessary evil in cities or even in rural areas, it enhances the quality of life for the general population.
Guns on the other hand, how does it enhances the quality of life for the general population?
The true purpose of a gun is to kill, whilst the true purpose of a vehicle is to transport goods and people.
Some of you have been to cities that has totally banned firearms or any weapons, some have harsh penalties such as hanging, as in the case of Singapore.
I think everyone can agree that Singapore is perhaps the safest city in the world.
And the number one killer there would either be diseases, old age and accidents but never gun related violence.
But in the US, tens of thousands are injured annually and that's not even counting the death toll.
2017, death related to guns - 39,000 Americans.
That's a staggering amount.
I'm trying to think on how owning a gun enhances a city's population quality of life but I can't seem to find a reasonable clue.