) B.
(Please don't hate me
I don't see the purpose in possessing a device that was literally designed with the sole mechanical intention of killing things. Although honestly that's just a bit of an ideological bias for me.
My main issue is that the events in which you would genuinely need to make use of a firearm, e.g the typical line of "There's a serial killer in my house" happen millions of times less frequently than the NRA would have you believe and ultimately, assuming that were to happen to a person and they happened to have the unlikely ability to retrieve their gun and use it effectively, those extremely exceptionally few instances just don't statistically justify the >30,000 preventable deaths due to gun violence and accidents every year that come as a result of the mass ownership of guns.
I think I've worded that badly so here's a summary: If we go through the annual national police records for last year we could probably count on a single hand the instances where somebody possessing a gun resulted in the prevention of their loss of life and limb in a situation where they were in genuine mortal danger. Those instances can't be used honestly as a reason for why we should allow the loss of tens of thousands of lives per year. Even with strict regulation there would still probably be hundreds per year.
I'm all for sports shooting and even recreational shooting since there's an ambiguous and undefined limit as to when the losses in an extreme sport become acceptable, but I don't think people should have free and unrestricted access at any time to their own personal firearm ever unless they're a licensed hunter or something.
B.
(Please don't hate me
I don't see the purpose in possessing a device that was literally designed with the sole mechanical intention of killing things. Although honestly that's just a bit of an ideological bias for me.
My main issue is that the events in which you would genuinely need to make use of a firearm, e.g the typical line of "There's a serial killer in my house" happen millions of times less frequently than the NRA would have you believe and ultimately, assuming that were to happen to a person and they happened to have the unlikely ability to retrieve their gun and use it effectively, those extremely exceptionally few instances just don't statistically justify the >30,000 preventable deaths due to gun violence and accidents every year that come as a result of the mass ownership of guns.
I think I've worded that badly so here's a summary: If we go through the annual national police records for last year we could probably count on a single hand the instances where somebody possessing a gun resulted in the prevention of their loss of life and limb in a situation where they were in genuine mortal danger. Those instances can't be used honestly as a reason for why we should allow the loss of tens of thousands of lives per year. Even with strict regulation there would still probably be hundreds per year.
I'm all for sports shooting and even recreational shooting since there's an ambiguous and undefined limit as to when the losses in an extreme sport become acceptable, but I don't think people should have free and unrestricted access at any time to their own personal firearm ever unless they're a licensed hunter or something.
These mutually exclusive choices you linear, clear thinking people insist upon
I'm trying and trying.
Um.....
Fuck.
( snuggle another time)
( based on today's choices)
I cannot see why it has to be a choice though.
Um ok.....
A gold/ copper/ bronze ( warm metals)
b platinum/ white gold / silver ( cold metals)
titanium, which i guess would be a cold metal
p.s. good selection on the previous choice
p.s.s. thanks for your condolences, elle
A. potato bread
B. 'regular' bread
A.
A. Dinner
B. Supper
