(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)

  • 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!