(As a general concept of how a society should run, not intended as a US-specific question.)

I sometimes see people on the internet saying that giving people easy access to guns is too risky and there should be stricter gun control, while simultaneously wanting to abolish the police? I’m just confused on what people really want?

You cant both abolish the police and then also disarm the citizens, gotta pick one. So which is it, internet? Self-policing with guns? Or reform the police?

[Please state what country you’re in]

---

(Also its funny how the far-right of the US is both pro-gun and pro-police, I’m confused by that as well)

  • RodgeGrabTheCat@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    15
    ·
    3 days ago

    I think the right to have a gun should also include the legal requirement to take and pass a tactical shoot course. No point in having a gun if one can’t hit their target in a stressful situation. Paper target shooting isn’t good enough.

    • Cptn_Slow@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      3 days ago

      Should it be state funded? Or should only people who can afford it be allowed to exercise their rights?

      • RodgeGrabTheCat@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        3 days ago

        User pay. Just like buying the gun, driving a car, a boating license, or a hunting license.

        The last thing I want in an active shooter situation is someone with more money than skill waving a gun around making the situation worse.

            • snooggums@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              2 days ago

              I am aware of that, but this comment chain started with the context of it being a right.

                • snooggums@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  2 days ago

                  This entire comment chain started with your comment that began with it as a right and the US has not been mentioned once.

                  I think the right to have a gun should also include the legal requirement to take and pass a tactical shoot course.

                  Sorry for engaging with your premise!

      • RodgeGrabTheCat@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        That sounds good. I once had a job interview where bud was trying to piss me off to see if I had a temper. Something like that could be useful as well.

    • agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      I’ll go further, and say the text of the 2nd Amendment implies gun owners should be members of a well-regulated militia. I think every State Guard should accept anyone who applies, and give them basic training. In exchange for being part of the reserve, and passing firearm classes, you can keep and bear arms.

      If you don’t want to be part of a well-related militia, no guns. If you can’t pass firearm training, no guns.

      • RodgeGrabTheCat@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        100% agree. This morning I was thinking about a reply (didn’t have time before leaving for work) along these lines. But more of reporting to any nearby active shooter situation and helping the cops in exchange for a free gun and training. I like your idea as well.