I'd say we accept death's from all those other sources because they serve some other usefull purpose in society, transporting people and goods for examples. Guns don't serve any practical purpose in society besides killing/injuring people. You can say you don't need to be shooting at people it can be only for target practice or hunting, but the fact is that it's main purpose and design is to kill people.
Sure there are some systems, just like there are multiple loop holes, like still being able to buy a gun from gun show is dumb, no background check nothing, as long as the person selling it to you doesn't think you're sketch you're pretty much good. It doesn't make sense that you'd talk about law of deminishing returns and then talk about securing individual household that has a gun in it. How do you even in do that in any practical matter?
Or you know they were dictators with too much power over their countries and countrymen. Destroyed/weakned any other government instituion that could challenge them. You want to avoid a tyrant? Make sure your government institutions are stronger than any one individual and have the power to constrain these dictators.
Why do you think tyrants/dictators all use the exact same playbook? Arrest/destroy your opposition, directly own or control the media, rewrite the consitution to protect yourself, make sure the military is loyal to you not the country,disarm the people if they aren't already and discredit all other branches of government.
It happened across africa, in turkey recently in venezuela even more recently. You want to avoid to hundreds of thousands of death? Make sure your government can't be taken over by 1 man.
You still don't understand do you. Most of the time it's not even about using the gun, it's about the repercussions of having it. If you had two towns, republicanville and democratville side by side. In the first, everyone had guns and could use them freely if you broke in and in the second you had 0 guns and strict laws about fighting back. You want to go rob a house, which city do you go do it in.
Guns are the great equalizer. The perp doesn't have that extra assurance to go do whatever. Why do you think 99% attacks happen in gun free zones. The perp feels like they have the upper hand.
That extends to government. You can write all the pretty bullshit you want to justify it to yourself but at the end of the day, the fact is that it's not words on a paper that stop people from doing bad things, it's a superior counter-force by opposing parties that enforce those nice words on a paper. When through subversion all branches of government can be corrupted, the people then become,
as a last resort, that opposing force to ensure accountability.
Yes, the circumstances in which your loved one's died matters. Do you think the loved one's of someone who opts for physician assisted death to end their suffering from an incurrable diseases and being able to share their last moments surrounded by their friends and family will experience the same amount/type of grief as a parent who's daughter was raped/tortured and then murdered?
If you want to think of death as simply the fact of not being alive anymore that's fine, but there are series of events that preceed death that are generally part of the act of dying.
What about the grief they experienced when they got the diagnoses, or the grief when things took a turn for the worse? The difference is one is prolonged the other is a shock. Both cases they would have wished their family member was alive and well. But we're diverging for my point. Again the point I'm getting at is if we value life so dearly that a random, statistically improbably event causes people to go batshit crazy about what we need to do to prevent a loss of life, why isn't that same gusto being applied to more likely killers.
Ok ok alors si je comprend bien je devrais tolérer le fait que mon kid se fasse peut-être tiré à l’école parce que c’est normal, c’est le même risque qui vient avec le fait d’avoir des voitures etc, etc et que ça en vaut grandement la peine d’être armés pour l’éventuelle possibilité que le gouvernement vire fou et veule tous nous exterminer ?
Do you not let your kid swim in the ocean because shark attacks? You used the wrong word, it's not normal, it's statistically improbable that a kid will get shot. The odds of getting attacked and killed by a shark are 1 in 3,748,067. From fireworks (1 in 340,733), lightning (1 in 79,746), drowning (1 in 1,134), a car accident (1 in 84).
Since 2010 there have been 133 incidences resulting in 160 deaths and 238 injuries.How many schools, how many children and how many hours of class. There have been more airplane incidences in that time so if you're worried that your kid is going to die in a hail of bullets, don't fly anywhere either.
