361
Anon breaks up
(sh.itjust.works)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 25 Jul 2025
361 points (100.0% liked)
Greentext
6828 readers
46 users here now
This is a place to share greentexts and witness the confounding life of Anon. If you're new to the Greentext community, think of it as a sort of zoo with Anon as the main attraction.
Be warned:
- Anon is often crazy.
- Anon is often depressed.
- Anon frequently shares thoughts that are immature, offensive, or incomprehensible.
If you find yourself getting angry (or god forbid, agreeing) with something Anon has said, you might be doing it wrong.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
The comments here are a good example of how the gun control movement is the left-wing counterpart to the pro-life movement. It's origin lies in emotion, not reason. It's filled with fallacious arguements and when that fails to convince someone, the movement tends to move towards snarky comments and outright hostility.
Evem those that are trying to be reasonable by drawing conclusions based on data almost always are using cherry-picked statistics that was fed by those trying to manipulate them.
It's very amusing to read such things from outside the American hellscape. Well, "amusing."
Let's say eventually there comes a government overreach that a popular armed uprising puts down. Every day until that day, children die. Accidental death from firearms is one of the leading causes of death of children in your country. (Do you feel that pricking sensation in your neck and face or are you immune to shame?) If the rebellion doesn't come soon enough (or at all) then you are underwater in terms of dead children. So, how long is that runway? How long do you get to keep killing children until you have to admit, fuck, this is costing us more than it's worth?
HAVE YOU EVEN DONE THE MATH, or are you just working from feelings?
To compare dead children to the cost of failing to check government power, we can reduce both to life-years lost:
🔫 Current Cost: Child Firearm Deaths in the U.S.
🏛️ Hypothetical Benefit: Preventing Tyranny
Assume a worst-case scenario:
Estimate risk:
In fact, high civilian armament may reduce stability:
📊 Expected Value Calculation
📉 Conclusion
Even with favorable assumptions:
Bottom line: The ongoing cost vastly outweighs the hypothetical benefit, and high armament may worsen long-term stability rather than protect it.
Tongue in cheek of course but it still makes a point. The facts-over-feelings crowd has to show that the benefit of firearms outweigh the very observable negative consequences, and they cannot. So they are arguing feelings, not facts.