The other dancers should have been armed as well, if their bodies would have been covered in guns the bullet couldn't have penetrated.
I laughed at this joke. +1 like.
By the way, how do I like posts?
Well, what still does not work for me, is this kind of cognitive dissonance for the lack of better words.
Argument : "Guns don't kill people! People kill people! Don't blame guns, they are an inanimate object!"
Argument 2: "Guns protect us from tyranny! Our constitutional rights!"
What an odd misunderstanding. Still, admitting it is the first step. No judgement here.
Guns are tools, like hammers and dildos. All tools can be used for good purposes and bad ones, especially the tools I just mentioned.
Good men with guns they obtained legally can use the power their guns grant them to protect you from bad people with guns they obtained illegally. Good men with guns they obtained legally can also make criminals think twice about taking their guns out and shooting you, because they might not want to get shot by the armed good guys around you. And if you want, you can become one of those armed good men. Or armed good women. Or armed good Attack Helicopterkin, it doesn't matter. You can become the unspoken threat that makes the muggers and rapists around you keep it in their pants.
Similarly, if the military ever goes bad, or the cops ever go bad, good men with guns can protect you. When corrupt brutes in North Korea attack their citizens, onlookers can't draw their guns and shoot the abusers, and the victims can't use guns to protect themselves either. Sure, Bubba and his shitty shotgun and Jamal and his shitty revolver and Frank and his edgelord glock collection might not do much against a tank brigade or drone strike, but the guys left over after a midnight drone strike and their assortment of weapons will get pissed off enough afterwards to start rioting and retaliating against the government that
just drone striked a fucking civilian/the legal property of a fucking civilian in his sleep. Man, it's amazing how often anti-gun people will say "Glocks can't beat tanks" like that matters in a Civilian VS Military scenario. If the military's really going to march on and murder its own people in cold blood for potentially being able to question it, those aren't the weapons you use to deal with tanks, they're the weapons you use to get revenge for your friends who just lost their lives and families to a military force every country on the planet is now going to want to destroy and conquer "For Great Justice".
Furthermore, these weapons can make the boots on the ground think twice before doing something stupid. Or rather, something that would only be stupid in their heads if the threat of getting shot for attempting it by civilians was there. Sure, the military and the cops might only have a small percentage of dicks, and those dicks will be less likely to be dicks if the threat of getting shot for it is on the table.
Now I hear this next thing from a lot of newbies to this discussion, so whether you think it or not, I'll address it right away anyway: If the idea of having to own a gun to protect yourself from bad men with guns seems too much like hard work, and you'd rather just live in a world without legally-obtainable guns, remember that nobody in Pulse, the gay nightclub in Ohio, wanted to legally own and carry a gun either.
How many of the pro-gun folks from US here have even visited Europe? Just asking because I'm genuinely interested to know.
Yeah, it was a wild fucking ride.