Welcome to the Unpopular Opinion community!
How voting works:
Vote the opposite of the norm.
If you agree that the opinion is unpopular give it an arrow up. If it's something that's widely accepted, give it an arrow down.
Guidelines:
Tag your post, if possible (not required)
Rules:
1. NO POLITICS
Politics is everywhere. Let's make this about [general] and [lemmy] - specific topics, and keep politics out of it.
2. Be civil.
Disagreements happen, but that doesn’t provide the right to personally attack others. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Please also refrain from gatekeeping others' opinions.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Shitposts and memes are allowed but...
Only until they prove to be a problem. They can and will be removed at moderator discretion.
5. No trolling.
This shouldn't need an explanation. If your post or comment is made just to get a rise with no real value, it will be removed. You do this too often, you will get a vacation to touch grass, away from this community for 1 or more days. Repeat offenses will result in a perma-ban.
Instance-wide rules always apply. https://legal.lemmy.world/tos/
I guess I’m the opposite then - I love guns, yet I probably wouldn’t get one even if I could. I definitely wouldn’t carry one. It’s too easy to make hasty, irreversible decisions with a firearm.
Carrying a gun means that every altercation has the potential to become life-threatening. I wouldn’t want to end up in a brawl while armed and risk having my own weapon used against me if I got overpowered. That’s something cops, for example, have to constantly be aware of.
I, on the other hand, am fascinated not just by guns but by weapons (and other military technology) from throughout history. Weapons, as products of human ingenuity, are unusual in the sense that they function in direct opposition to the ingenuity of other humans. It's a very high-stakes competition.
i own a gun whose sole purpose of being manufactured was to kill himans - it is a war rifle.
i have killed as many things with it as i want to: zero.
i am not a gun nut, but i do enjoy the history of it. i learned a lot about yugoslavia just because i was curious about the time period it came from.
i agree that some guns are created with the sole purpose of killing people... i just dont feel like killing people with it. never have, never will (its not for protection, etc.. its for history)
What I have a problem understanding is that the native Americans were able to hunt without firearms. They literally used sharpened stones and sticks on horseback. Yet, gun enthusiasts will swear up and down they need guns for "hunting." I get using new tech to make a job easier, but your life isn't dependant on the kill anymore. If it was truly "for the hunt," then wouldn't you want to honor the hunt the way your ancestors did? I know a few bow hunters and I have mad respect for them, because bow hunting needs a high level of tracking skills as well (not to say rifle hunting doesn't but a peice of metal being propelled by an explosion has a bigger punch than a piece of metal being propelled by a pulled bow string, thus a bigger damage output.) I get guns are fun but if your going to hunt, honor the hunt. The buck doesn't have new upgraded antlers or legs.
I was with you up until the "I would still get one for safely" part. We must clearly live in different kinds of areas, I've never felt the need to own one for any reason.
OP is right though, there are parts of the world where self defense is not as clear cut. The question you need to follow up with is "is this self defense against nature or people?".
For example, there are places in the far north where polar bears are a problem, I doubt anyone other than Greenpeace would not have a problem with you shooting an animal attacking you. Its tragic, but by that point its not really avoidable.
The issue most of us have is the "defense against people" where lines get drawn, the problem is how inconsistent that line is. Im in the camp where survival is fine, and sport is conditionally ok, but outside that there are no ethical reasons to persue gun ownership, but others will say collections, historic preservation, or self defense are valid reasons. Culture has a lot to do with it, some places handle it well, like Switzerland, but the elephant in the room is America and their, I would argue very unhealthy, relationship with guns.
I've played shooter games since a kid and I've never wanted to own a gun. it's 100% a special kind of brainrot/power trip to want to hold and own deadly weapons and you won't convince me otherwise
yes hunting is a thing, I promise you the vast majority of American gun owners are not hunters.
I can appreciate guns from a technical design standpoint. Some of them can look good. I'd even consider owning an inert USFA Zip .22 as an example of spectacularly bad product design. (I'm a UI/UX guy and the total lack of consideration for ergonomics is fascinating to me.)
I have no desire to own a functioning gun, though. Very few people really need one.
