Denver police have arrested a 13-year-old boy accused of fatally shooting a man whose leg was blocking the aisle on a public bus.

  • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    45
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    9 months ago

    This same person told me in another thread that the reason guns should be legal in the U.S. is protection against bears and mountain lions- which almost never attack anyone. Like less than 100 times in the last 50 years combined. They can’t even come up with a good argument for adults to have guns.

    • ickplant@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      9 months ago

      Speak for yourself, I get viciously mauled by a mountain lion every time I go grocery shopping.

    • HelluvaKick@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      9 months ago

      Used to have to shoot cottonmouths and copperheads all the time when I lived out in the country. We were too far from a hospital to chance it with poisonous snakes. Glad we moved

      • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        9 months ago

        Which is a valid argument because people out in the country can get bitten by snakes and be too far from a hospital. The only time he mentioned poisonous snakes was when he said people need guns to protect themselves from rattlesnakes in Dallas.

      • Socsa@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        9 months ago

        I have killed plenty of snakes in my life and never once thought a gun would be useful for that task.

        • brygphilomena@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          9 months ago

          Snake/rat shot is designed for this task. Basically small shotgun pellets in a handgun cartridge. I’d think it a rather small target to aim a regular bullet at.

    • Candelestine@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      9 months ago

      Honestly it doesn’t really matter. The second amendment does exist, so some arms in the hands of the populace will be allowed unless we amend our constitution.

      That said, we can draw lines based around what kinds of weapons. And something like a bolt action rifle or pump shotgun can be excellent for hunting, but very difficult to conceal or commit any kind of mass shooting with.

      It’s semi-autos that are specifically capable of high rates of fire and quick reloads, and that become dangerous. We can regulate some of those arms the same way we regulate access to tanks, jets, nukes and chemical/biological arms.

    • TheSanSabaSongbird@lemdro.id
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      9 months ago

      As a longtime SAR guy --I’m in my 50s-- I always tell people to carry a gun in the backcountry if that’s what makes them feel safe, but just know that you’re far far far more likely to get in trouble from things like weather, terrain, rivers, meltwater, falling, exposure, hypothermia and just the elements in general than you are from any animal. The risk profiles aren’t even remotely close. This is true even in places like Alaska where almost everyone is armed. As far as I’m concerned, a gun is dead weight. Lose it and concentrate instead on carrying the ten essentials and knowing how to use them

      • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        9 months ago

        Yes, that would definitely be one of the many, many better arguments for guns than ‘protection against bears and mountain lions.’

        • TWeaK@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          9 months ago

          Even then, though, you don’t need pistols for hunting.

          • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            9 months ago

            I do know of people who hunt with handguns, but it is definitely rarer. I honestly don’t have any issues with hunting if you eat what you hunt. If you just do it to massacre an animal and just leave it where you killed it, fuck you, but I have no issue with responsible hunting practices.

            That said, it’s my understanding that bow hunting is the fastest, and thus most painless way of killing an animal.

            • NoIWontPickaName@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              6
              ·
              edit-2
              9 months ago

              That is completely False.
              I have shells that will cause a 3 to 4 inch cavitation hole when they hit something causing a large amount of damage and blood loss that will kill with any hit in the chest area.

              With a bow, even if you hit the heart it will still take time, especially if you miss and then it is bleeding, suffering, and you have to track it.

              At top skill in both I would say it is a tie in that both have the potential to kill instantly, a bow is more likely to harm than kill at lower skill levels though.

            • TWeaK@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              9 months ago

              Yes but you’d struggle to get close enough to make a reliably good shot. Ranged shots are what rifles are for.

              • NoIWontPickaName@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                9 months ago

                Most of the things I’ve shot in my life with the rifle I was close enough I could’ve done it with a pistol.

                We hunt in forests around here not plains.

                • TWeaK@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  9 months ago

                  Pistol shooting practice is typically done at no more than 25 yards, while hunting rifles can more comfortably do a longer range. Sure, you can hit with a pistol at similar ranges (especially with a larger caliber as you propose) but rifles are better for controlling the recoil and typically more accurate. If the goal is to actually hit, and in particular kill painlessly, a rifle is the better tool.

                  • NoIWontPickaName@kbin.social
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    9 months ago

                    I think the farthest shot I have had was maybe 35 yards.

                    You basically find a good trail and put up a blind or stand near it.

                    We have to cut our own firing lanes so short distances are much preferred. Lol

        • NoIWontPickaName@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          9 months ago

          Tbf I carry a rifle any time I go in the woods damn near.

          I love nature but am terrified of bears and I want a big firecracker, if it comes down to trying to use it on a bear that wants to fight I am probably already fucked and I know that.

      • jonne@infosec.pub
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        9 months ago

        An activity where you would definitely supervise the child, not send them off on their own on a bus.

          • NoIWontPickaName@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            9 months ago

            I have both and they both have their advantages and disadvantages.

            I prefer my rifle because it has a much much higher chance of a clean quick kill.

            Personally if you are willing to let an animal suffer more to be more “manly” you were never manly at all.

            • BingoBangoBongo@midwest.social
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              9 months ago

              I don’t do either. I’m primarily vegetarian because I know I wouldn’t want to kill an animal irl so I just generally avoid meat all together.