Ack. I know I said I’d leave it where I did, but I can’t deal with the argument that standing and pointing a thing and pulling a tiny lever is the same as walking up to a human and shoving a piece of steel into them, face-to-face.
Guns offer the possibility to kill remotely, and without the messy work of dealing with the most grizzly details until the deed is already done. They also allow for killing on a much, much larger scale than knives.
Okay, sorry, now I’m stopping.

Ack. I know I said I’d leave it where I did, but I can’t deal with the argument that standing and pointing a thing and pulling a tiny lever is the same as walking up to a human and shoving a piece of steel into them, face-to-face.

Guns offer the possibility to kill remotely, and without the messy work of dealing with the most grizzly details until the deed is already done. They also allow for killing on a much, much larger scale than knives.

Okay, sorry, now I’m stopping.

  1. samsplace said: The difference is quite literally whether or not you have blood on your hands.
  2. brooklyntree said: I think my problem lies with the auto and semi auto guns that can fire a hundred shots in 60 seconds. What could a person POSSIBLY want to do with that except to hurt others?
  3. pocketcontents said: thank you. there’s is a much greater detachment when you use a gun to kill, especially in a culture accustomed to screen killing, and no, i’m not blaming video games, just pointing out a culture of detached killing—drone warfare, etc.
  4. hammerito posted this
-
Friday, 14th December