Submitted by 9lobaldude t3_1090iiy in news
[deleted] t1_j3y45wg wrote
Reply to comment by pakattak in Man with knife wounds six people at Paris Gare du Nord station - police by 9lobaldude
[removed]
pakattak t1_j3y50fb wrote
Attempting to minimize death and harm is usually a good governing policy
[deleted] t1_j3y6b0v wrote
[removed]
pakattak t1_j3y99xh wrote
If you had someone attacking you would you want them to have a knife or a gun?
[deleted] t1_j3ykrez wrote
[removed]
pakattak t1_j3ynodk wrote
If we’re talking hypothetically then the knife. Preferably one that I can pull quickly like a switch blade. Guns are too hard to pull on someone rapidly closing distance on you in the case of a completely random attack and while a knife is chaotic, at least I’ll be able to use it at close range.
Shogun_SC2 t1_j3y5kjp wrote
The answer is there is no acceptable body count for any violence you stupid dick, but I guess I’ll actually engage with you and say the answer is 0. Knives make the number closer to 0 than guns do. Show me data otherwise or you’re just another one of these stupid idiots who don’t think before they post and think they are dunking on people when you actually just appear like an unintelligent asshole.
[deleted] t1_j3yi9x0 wrote
[removed]
pakattak t1_j3yo3k4 wrote
This is a completely useless statistic unless you pair it with effectiveness or ratio of victim vs perpetrator.
The argument is knives are harder to commit mass murders with vs a gun. Of course knives will be more popular globally because other countries control access to guns.
pakattak t1_j416kvt wrote
Oh man and further, knives are just way more accessible than guns are in general. Every kitchen in a household has a knife. Not everyone owns a gun and yet the fact that it accounts for 41 percent of global violence is not the defense you think it is
mx5slol t1_j3yk19y wrote
i love how you have downvotes for what appears to me to be the most logically, not emotionally, supported position
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments