Ammophilia

Notes

Lots of potential material in this post:

• Loaded questions:
  • Q: If you think a “no guns” sign is sufficient, why do we have metal detectors at airports?
    • A: It's sufficient in a public park, where someone with a gun could only kill dozens of people; used to take over an airplane, a gun could potentially kill thousands (as in 9/11). (This is so obvious it shouldn't have to be explained.)
  • Q: You think if you don’t see a gun on a person, he doesn’t have one?
    • A: No. The ability to have someone removed if a gun is spotted acts as a deterrent.
  • Q: "If I walk in one door with a gun on my hip, walk through the room, and out the opposite door, how did that harm you?"
    • A: This is equivalent to asking "If I do something dangerous but it comes out okay, then who have I harmed?". It should be obvious that this is not a responsible question.
• Bogus arguments:
  • "when guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns" variations:
    • "Putting up a sign at a park can only ever stop law-abiding people from bringing their guns into the park." (This is the argument again.)
    • "...the people we really don't want to have guns in those areas are the same people who would ignore the ban. "
    • Even just reducing the number of law-abiding citizens carrying guns would be a good thing, as this would reduce the number of accidental gun deaths.
    • Anti-gun sentiment is just bigotry - "your statement sounds dangerously close to the same kind of wording you see republicans using when talking about gays."
      • Wrong; guns are actually harmful.