What About Guns For Marginalized People?
Вставка
- Опубліковано 19 лют 2024
- ▶Join this channel to get access to perks:
ua-cam.com/users/steveshivesjoin
▶Patreon: / steveshives
▶PayPal: www.paypal.me/SteveShives
▶Venmo: venmo.com/thatguysteveshives
▶Twitter: / steve_shives
▶Facebook: / thatguysteveshives
▶Instagram: / steve.shives
Listen to the Late Seating podcast:
▶RSS: / sounds.rss
▶Soundcloud: / late-seating
Listen to The Ensign's Log podcast:
▶RSS: / sounds.rss
▶Soundcloud: / the-ensigns-log-podcast
#guncontrol - Розваги
I think the metaphor to "no ethical consumption under capitalism" is perfect, as long as you actually understand that phrase, this is a very similar plight of the society we've built. No one's asking you to not survive.
It's not an expression I hear often, but I agree. Similar to the phrase "meat is murder," I guess. I'm not trying to be cynical, but, as an omnivore, I accept the fact that I'm complicit in a system in which death and suffering of animals fills my stomach. And thus, we unethically consume.
@@jessesloan864 There are a lot of people who aren't vegans or vegetarians that keep that phrase in mind, and try to reduce suffering where they can. Even deciding to eat one less burger a month is technically contributing to the problem less.
A lot of people see those phrases and think they either have to do it 100%, or completely reject the concept. But any amount of improvement is something.
I'm not saying that's how you are thinking, though. Your comment just touched on something I wanted to expand on.
All consumption is unethical. The first caveman who killed a deer to eat took that deer away from another one. The nutrients for crops run out eventually, and then what do you tell other people who want to use that land?
The economic system has nothing to do with it.
@@BirdRaiserE And here I thought the problem was he took the deer's life away from the deer.
@@jessesloan864 "Meat is murder" is legally incorrect. Murder is illegal killing, and killing animals for meat is legal, so it isn't murder. Likewise, capital punishment and killing enemy soldiers in war aren't murder.
Are all carnivores murderers? Are there ethical cats, spiders, and sharks? Is the biosphere ethical? If yes, then what is its ethics? If not, then does 'ethics' have any useful meaning?
speaking from secondhand experience, I know of a queer/trans-friendly venue in Oregon that was recently experiencing a series of physical assaults on patrons leaving said bar and the local police weren't being especially confidence-inspiring in their response. Ultimately the community dealt with the problem by setting up volunteer armed walking escorts and rides. I wish it weren't the case but that's what they felt they had to do, and as far as I'm aware it was successful in stopping the attacks.
Ultimately the right wing only understands one language.
Yeah, that’s what Steve is saying. If you have to have a gun to feel safe then it’s just a sign your society has failed and needs serious reforming.
So they formed a militia, and it was well-regulated. Problem solved.
@@user-tp7gy4dj4lthat doesn’t solve the problem of the threats though. The problem there is the threat against people that the police are unwilling to address because of bigotry. Adding guns is just a very short term bandaid that can lead to even more disastrous results. It would be better to address the bigotry as a society than to see violence as the only solution.
@martionman true, and we must live in the society we have while people twiddle their thumbs instead of working on fixing society.
All I know for sure is that I had three friends, trans women, who owned guns for protection.
I was happy they did, because they all lived in horrible parts of the USA.
One of them is still alive, doing fairly well and she ultimately got rid of her gun.
The other two shot themselves.
😢
You take the gun away, those two would still have died just by different means, because the cause was a terrible society.
Condolences. I hope you're doing ok
This is why I will never endorse gun ownership, even in cases where I understand and sympathize with why the person wants it. There are more ways it can go wrong than right. I won't judge or tell someone in that situation how to live their life, but it's never something I'll wholeheartedly support.
@@SteveShives
A wise man once said "no situation is ever made safer by introducing a gun into it."
I fear the situations where they do good are outliers.
It’s hard to seize the means of production with thoughts and prayers
It's still pretty hard with guns. It's only really been successful...four times? I'm counting Russia, China, Vietnam, and Cuba on that list. I can't think of other shooting revolutions where those in power didn't pretty much immediately seize all power and resources for themselves.
"All political power grows out of the barrel of a gun" -Mao Zedong
@@Frommerman ...and?
That’s not what they’re being used for…
And none of those countries became better places to live after. There’s this idea in America you need guns to take on the government when they go rogue but it’s a democracy. There are mechanisms for change. Maybe try them first?
Gay Gun owner here. I'll take being (ideologically) irresponsible and alive over ethical and dead.
I'd also sleep better if I knew my allies (left/liberal/moderate) were capable of backing me up when push comes to violence. It really frightens me that instead the average stance for them is "Boy, how terrible. At least I didn't contribute to the problem by defending them." as the literal Nazis are at the gates.
We live in a violent and broken society. Become capable of violence or become dead.
Still love you, Steve.
Yes, these rwnj believe every white guy hitting the backstop thinks just like they do. I support Armed Equality, never heard of them until Beau of the Fifth Column in his longer than he intended series on guns.
Literally what half of this video was about, maybe next time watch a video before you comment on it LOL
My sentiments exactly!
From an Egalitarian Socialist Queer Romani person.
Ironically the Nazis were the gun grabbers.
Dumb people forget that the only thing that defeated the Nazis was millions of armed communists.
I'm reminded of the statistic (and forgive me if I'm being repetitive, I haven't seen the previous video in reference) that owning a gun tends not to make you safer, but instead predisposes you to more risk of gun violence, which can be violence from a member of the household, from an accident, or from suicide. But also, when push came to shove in the US civil rights movement, the Black Panthers protected a whole lot of people from police violence and police brutality because they were effectively an armed militia. That was also the time that the NRA wholeheartedly endorsed gun control, in case anyone has any confusion as to where they stand on those principles.
@@AdamBladeTaylor Unless it's the cops breaking in. Then they were already at risk, and a gun maybe makes some of that kind of criminal think twice before doing a no-knock raid on someone's grandma.
Fun fact: The Mulford Act banning carrying a gun without a permit in California was named after a Republican and signed into law by Ronald Reagan in response to the Black Panthers using open-carry to deter police violence.
This is a great comment. However, I'd like to mention that the Black Panthers were a lot more than an armed militia, and that a huge amount of what they did was essentially making their own social programs to provide for black communities, which were often overlooked by government programs. The point of this was to both help people as well as to illustrate the inadequacy of the government, to make people expect more, because if an organization like the Panthers could do so much to help these communities, then the government clearly could do much, much more, and was also shown unequivocally to be doing far less than what it ought to be.
I have a close friend who has been threatened online for his views... he carries a gun with him and has said the best thing, I feel, that you can say about being someone who carries a gun: "Whenever I carry it, I'm constantly worried about using it, even if I know I won't need to. It's a burden on my hip and something that I'm always aware of and never want to use. Everyone who carries a gun if they feel their safety is threatened also needs to feel that way... you're prepared to use it but *scared* to use it. Always the last of last resorts and you're aware of the power [of the gun]."
Thats as responsible as you can ever get. Anything above that is a sociopath.
This is the way. I am an owner for recreational reasons, and NOT a carrier, because I'm NOT prepared, mentally, to use it in that kind of situation. The guy who survived being shot by Kyle Rittenhouse in Kenosha, WI was carrying, drew and aimed at Rittenhouse, but did not fire. He was seriously injured and two of his friends were killed. It's impossible to know for sure if Rittenhouse would have fired specifically at their group or not otherwise, or whether shooting Rittenhouse would have prevented or at least cut short the tragic situation, but it illustrates all too well that the mental preparation is more important than the physical preparation of just having a gun to carry.
The thing is, it's not like other means of self defense don't exist. Guns don't create a forcefield that negates all other forms of attack. Pepper spray works on someone with a gun just as well as someone without.
You'll never make it through being a police rookie.
@@mitchellforney6109 "the guy who survived" was Gaige Grosskreutz.
According to Milwaukee Journal Sentinel:
"He told jurors he thought he was going to die when Rittenhouse pointed his rifle at him. But the gun jammed, and as Rittenhouse re-racked the weapon, Grosskreutz decided to jump on Rittenhouse, rather than shoot him with Grosskreutz's own handgun, which he was holding. Grosskreutz said he had come alone to Kenosha that night from West Allis to provide assistance to demonstrators. A trained paramedic, Grosskreutz said he had been going to protests to do so all summer." Other reports describe how Grosskreutz and the others around Rittenhouse when he opened fire believed that he was an active shooter, and their only hope was to subdue him.
I will say you are right there is no responsible gun owners, but I'm a black guy with a sundown town next to my town. I guess then I'm proudly irresponsible because it allows me to live to be irresponsible.
You're being irresponsible while near an entire town of significantly less responsible people. You're not the problem.
You’re proving Steve’s point there. Rampant gun ownership is a symptom of systematic failure and a lack of empathy in public policy. You should be safe without it but you’re not because you’ve been failed.
@@foxesofautumnI was coming in to say he should be armed because…….and then I realized you’re right. He should, today, but he has been failed utterly that my default response was to get strapped. We do have a problem here and it saddens me.
The only reason I bought one a few years ago was due to the culture war, and I agree with you, I hate that I have to arm myself. Thanks for your understanding and I hope a day comes that I feel safe enough to not need it.
I think of it this way. When all of your choices are bad ones, the most you can do is pick the least bad one. That's really all any of us can do in this awful society. It's impossible to live in this society and not do any harm. All we can do is try to minimize the harm we do.
my mom refuses, but at some point, i might HAVE to get one if the state of California is invaded by the likes of theses anti-woke nincompoops.
The problem that arises is that the solution also contributes right back to the problem. There CAN never be a day that comes where you feel safe enough not to need it under that paradigm.
Last year I gifted my 14 yr old TGirl the Tanto Dagger the first tanto I bought, and wore at the small of my back thru my 20s... This year the family is getting 2 shotguns....
I hate that I'm doing it... (Kinda... The inner GI Joe collector is thrilled)... But (in full Picard) "the line must be drawn Heyah!!... This Far, No Further"
That couldn’t have been an easy video to make. But honestly I can’t think of any other American YTuber who would have addressed it. Speaking as a British person whose recently seen the death of Brianna Ghey, a young trans woman, at the hands of knife wielding transphobes, I never want to see the day those murderers can get their hands on guns.
And in the US that tragedy is just as (if not more) likely to be used as a pro-gun talking point about how gun-forbidding countries have a massive amount of knife crime.
It's a complete and blatant lie that could easily be fact checked but it matches how they think the world should work.
Yet it looks like there are almost 575k certified people in UK to own 1.4 mill shotguns. Another 139k certified to have 435k other types of firearms.
The UK has regulation, vs Steve’s “beliefs” (aka dogma/religion) that they can’t be justified under any circumstances.
That's the problem isn't it? Evil people are going to always do evil things. Why make things harder for law abiding persons to defend themselves. Especially in the UK. Have anti-gun and anti-knife laws made anyone safer? Demonstrably, not at all.
😅😊
I agree no one should need to go armed in any civilized society no one should be in such fear of their lives that they feel safer armed than not.
I do want to come out of the woodwork and say hi. It's a rough subject and I've been on both sides. As a trans woman who grew up basically teething on guns, I need to say that yeah, they're scary. I'm scary for knowing how to use them and having access to them. It sucks. But I'm on your side.
i'd be on your side if things went south; i trust someone who knows how to use a gun properly rather than someone i wouldn't trust to take care of my cats and my mom's rabbits.
I hope there are people in your life that you trust to tell you when you are being scary. Your comment made me think of the Red Means Recording guy whose partner hid his gun when he started to share his suicidal thoughts, but it could even be something as simple as getting too hot headed.
I'm aligned with Steve's philosophy on guns, but at the same time as a resident of Portland, Ore. I am very appreciative of the leftists who are armed, practice as a militia, and stand in opposition to literal nazis that have tried to cause harm here
I'm also trans, and if I trusted myself with a gun, I would certainly own one. Any LGBTQIA+ person who is in a place where they can trust themselves with a gun should at least consider the option.
No, you're not scary for knowing how to use them. It may feel that way.... knowing how to easily kill is uncomfortable. But, as an outsider, that while knowledge can be used to create danger, knowledge in and of itself isn't danger. Likewise, 'having access to' doesn't sound like you've got a bunker stuffed with them. Your post reflects no lack of the somber respect right wing gun nuts don't have for what they are and what they do. Instead they mythologize and fetishize them. You're not doing that. Give yourself a little slack.
I hear what Steve's saying and can't find a place where I disagree with him: statistically having a firearm makes you more at risk, but understand why people own them
Why exactly does owning a firearm make you more at risk?
There's a wrinkle with those statistics. A lot of the danger is in suicides. But this assumes all suicides are bad. My mother had Parkinson's that was absolutely awful, and failed a suicide attempt using pills. She lived for several more years in constant agony with no meaningful quality of life. She said she regretted not buying a gun when she was in good health. I don't think anyone can deny that to someone in a situation like that.
@@Linkedblade Most of the statistics linking ownership to risk are either suicides or the neglect of basic safety procedures. There is also a matter of being disarmed and having the gun used against you. The fact is most people just aren't killers. They hesitate. This is why military drills firearm training so it becomes a matter of muscle memory. If you have a gun for self defense, you must be prepared to actually use it for that purpose, otherwise they're a liability. The irony is, being unprepared to kill while owning a gun is the greater danger to the owner.
@@aluisious I am terribly sorry to hear that, and speaking as a former medical professional and current public health professional I absolutely sympathize. But I'd argue that problem would have been better solved by a sane medical system which recognizes the right of terminal patients to decide when they want out. You can't exactly fail a suicide attempt when it's a doctor handing you twice the lethal dose of morphine.
Of course, that also requires a sane economic system which doesn't force people to choose euthanasia for finance-adjacent reasons. And a sane society which recognizes the horrific harms done historically by those who claimed to be "humanely euthanizing the disabled" and does everything in its power to prevent even the appearance of that. And a sane political system capable of accomplishing any of this. And a future in which any of this can happen, which it doesn't look like we're going to get due to climate change.
There's...so much work that needs doing, and it's all interwoven.
@@Frommerman Seeing a lot of "It would be better if this or that" from both the comments and the video. Thing is, we don't live in that world and playing the "what if" game isn't doing us any favors. I WANT a world in which the medical system recognizes the right to choose for a terminal patient, I WANT a world without guns, I WANT a world where I dont have to worry about someone trying to make me a social media hashtag, but we don't live there and until we do I'm content with trying to build that world and being armed while I do it. If we're going the total disarmament route, I'm okay with that, but I'm not handing mine in until all the nazis and white-hooded cops turn theirs in first.
All I know is every gun owner thinks that they are a responsible gun owner.
Kind of like how everyone thinks they're a great driver.
They can't all be right.
For those people in marginalized groups it can be a necessary evil. The modern societal structure forces some people to do things that aren't ethical in order to live. Society is built in a way where marginalized groups have to resort to unethical actions such as owning firearms just to have a chance at surviving. The only option for those people is to fuel the fire. Until the problems in society are completely reformed from the ground up, this will continue to be the only option for some people. Are their actions justified then?
(r)amen ... I'm doing that very thing with my tax return, and I hate it ...
The Black Panthers taking up arms got gun control legislation written up in record time.
My teen kid is gay. As long as bigots exist, I will support firearm sales. I was always pro gun, but now, more so. I do want restrictions on the AR 15 , or AK47 type rifles however
@@shingshongshamalama- I always tell that story to point out the hypocrisy in right wing philosophy.
I live out in the woods, tiny female, now well over 60, in the Northeast. I do own a gun, a small revolver, given to me long ago by a cop (former boyfriend,) because my father was dying and it was just my mom and me.
I'm a military trained person, military Medical Healthcare Specialist, plus all the Army training, so I know safety protocols with firearms. I've no desire to hurt someone, but am in the middle of the woods, and the police, when called, are many miles away.
Most of the time, it sits in a small safe, easy to access for me, but out of reach to others. Sometimes I take it to the range, so I can familiarize and orient.
The one time I carried it afield was when a local hunter wounded a deer and lost the trail as it crossed my land. I found the trail, but lost it in my swamp, where the water was too deep/wide to cross. I do not eat mammal, but also cannot bear the thought of an animal dying in long agony- would've put it out of its misery had I found it.
I remember many conversations with my former military brothers and sisters, as they expounded the virtues of their various firearms, and methods to augment/change their function/range/capacity. I did not/do not, understand their desire to do so.
I consider myself to be a responsible firearms owner, but there are those around me who I question as to WHY THE F**k do you need all that?
If you disagree, that's ok. I pretty much agree with you, Steve, on almost everything, and am willing to calmly debate/discuss, if you have questions/comments.
Or we can agree to disagree- your channel is brilliant, and I'd still follow.
I live in a rural area in New Hampshire, so there's a high number of guns. We have a single part-time police officer around, and I can understand the need for some protection. Not just from people, but aggressive wildlife. Black bear don't get rabies (apparently), but can be aggressive very rarely. We have coyotes too that can attack and kill household pets and will come very close to human habitation.
Hunting is big here. For many it isn't just a fun thing to do, but a serious boost to food. In that case though, a person could always bow hunt instead.
@@perryjohnson7529 Bow hunting is in general way more harsh on animals than firearm hunting. That's not to say that rifle hunting avoids animal suffering, of course, but there's just a way larger margin for error to prevent suffering when you're using a 3,000 feet / second projectile than a 275 ft/s one.
I appreciate the thought you've put into this, Steve. I am in a similar situation as yourself. Straight, white, hetero dude. It's easy for me to decide not to own a gun, even though I have really enjoyed shooting guns in the past at target ranges. (Starting with Boy Scouts when I was young) It's an easy decision for me based on statistics of gun-related violence and gun ownership. It's important to consider our perspectives are based on our personal realities.
Just to point this out, but when you say you’re, “straight, hetero” you do realize that what you’re saying is that you’re “straight, straight” because hetero means straight last time I checked. I think what you may have been trying to say is that you’re straight cisgender man. Correct me if I’m wrong.
@@lizsavage1178 Lol! Yes, I meant to say straight cis, or something similar. D'oh!
Being the parent of a trans daughter I should have considered this point. Training for concealed carry with annual follow up and liability insurance for all gun owners should be legally required.
Justice John Paul Stevens suggested adding 5 words to the 2nd amendment so it would read:
A well regulated militia, being necessary for the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms WHILE SERVING IN THE MILITIA shall not be infringed.
You do realize this means that rich oppressors can get them easily, and minorities have to fear?
As opposed to how it is now, where rich gun manufacturers can make bank off of the revolving door of "a lot of people have guns, I should get one to protect myself from other people with guns. Especially with that big mass shooting that just happened."
People are being manipulated into buying guns. Something like Uvalde should have been a one in a century type of tragedy, not just another Tuesday in America.
Organize militias on the County/state level... Under the Sheriff's office????
It solves BOTH concerns (probably raises some more .. like cray cray sherrifs.....so some state level oversight would be needed.... Perhaps semi integration with the Natl Guard ?....
Idk, I'm spit balling....but I have suggested Co Sherrifs offices as a winning argument (amongst friends) over natl gun registry and transfer of title...(another story)
@@BelRigh Switzerland has basically solved this problem? National conscription into a 100% defensive military which lets you own the rifle after your term of service. You're not allowed to store it in your home, but every citizen has access regardless of resources.
Of course, Switzerland has its own racism problems, and it's effectively impossible for non-white people to even become citizens, so this isn't a field test of a solution in similar conditions. But it might be soluble.
That's what the militia used to be, before modernization such as the creation of a large standing Army. WW I. But the Court is pretty selective at applying real history to its interpretation. Yesterday was further proof of that.
I live in Georgia. While it technically flipped blue last year, lots of counties are still red, including mine. We were watching coverage of the election on Jan 6th. We were so afraid some idiot down here was going to try something similar we locked the gate leading to our property and my dad pulled out and loaded my grandfather's old shotgun. Crazy how the people who claim to be all about 2nd amendment rights and gun safety are the ones that make us feel unsafe
This is a good follow-up. Thank you. I'll be glad when we return to sanity in this country.
For real. Gun ownership shouldn't be seen as some ideal- it should be seen as a prediction that this society has, is, and will continue to fail itself (at least outside of owning firearms for like wildlife control etc.)
Mr. Pack rat, don’t hold your breath. The older I get the more I believe sanity (and critical thinking) at a national level are lost skills to many Americans.
@@Canoby I bought a shotgun 30+ years ago for wildlife control. It has sat in a closet for most of those years. I've thought about buying a handgun for protection but talked myself out of it because, realistically, barring an incident such as the worman (yes, trans woman, but why not normalize her?) Steve mentioned experienced, it's unlikely a single handgun is likely to be of much use. Having the gun will only help if you have it at hand, it's not taken away from you, and your opposition has one gun fewer than you do. Also, there have been two incidents of gun violence in my family, so I'm disinclined to ownership.
@@donaldwert7137 Glad your shotgun has proven to have been an unnecessary investment, and hoping it stays that way
I’m a hunter in a very rural part of British Columbia. Don’t own a handgun and wouldn’t. My long guns rarely see the light of day and are stored in a hidden safe in pieces and with the rounds stored in a separate safe. I’m licensed having taken multiple safety courses. All that said, I don’t like guns and having them causes a little discomfort.
And that attitude is why we don't have this same problem here in Canada. We don't fetishize guns, and generally don't keep a whole lot of handguns. I remember my sister being shocked when she found our late stepfather's old gun (a WWII trophy of his father's, we think), and all she could think to do was call the police to come and collect it, since she's got kids, and doesn't want them around a gun, even one that's antique and unloaded.
Sure, we grew up out in the country where everyone's family had at least a shotgun, but they were always safely locked up, hidden, and placed under threat of most severe grounding if we kids were ever caught messing around with them. They were grown up tools that could kill you, like most of the other stuff in the barn that we weren't supposed to touch. And that's all.
We have a couple old hunting guns in our house. They haven't been fired in probably 40 years or more. I'm not even sure if we have ammunition. They are my father's guns from when he hunted long ago. I think they are pretty common around here. I live in New Hampshire, so it's probably similar territory to BC, just the other side of the continent. ;)
@@thing_under_the_stairs Throwing out a family heirloom is kind of fucked up but I understand why considering they had kids around.
"show me someone who had to resort to violence, and I'll show you someone who ran out of good ideas" - Doug Funnie's dad
Not everyone in our world is presented with good options
Yep! The solution is seeing that they are.
Might be easier if public programs weren’t viewed as “communist.”
During political debates, I realized something that I think applies here. I was watching a Republican candidate berate a Democratic candidate for taking corporate donations even though the Democratic candidate has stated that he was for changing the rules to prohibit corporate campaign donations. The thing I realized was this:
It is okay to play by the same rules as your opponent in a contest, even if you are trying to get the rules changed.
And that's how I feel about marginalized groups carrying guns in the present United States. We are not in the utopia of all guns being banned, and there are people with guns who would prey on marginalized people. So in my opinion, in present-day United States, it is okay for marginalized people to do the same in order to protect themselves. In fact, I can think of nothing that will turn conservatives into proponents of gun-safety regulations than the image of all the people they want to terrorize as armed gunmen.
Until the societal rules change, then it's okay to play by the current rules. I just hope we can manage to change the rules someday.
"I can think of nothing that will turn conservatives into proponents of gun-safety regulations than the image of all the people they want to terrorize as armed gunmen."
The Black Panthers going openly armed actually pushed both the republican Party and the NRA into pro-gun control positions! Obviously seeing black people defending their own neighbourhoods themselves, often from the police, wasn't what they had in mind when they decided that "all Americans" should have the right to own firearms.
Not wrong! In fact, armed minorities protecting themselves against the white racists that were preying on their communities are (unfortunately) the origins of the original gun control laws. These laws were never enforced against white people, but they were heavily enforced against black people, thus the origins of the stereotype of illegal guns being mostly owned by black criminals.
And, that utopia cannot and should not exist. Because it turns out bears and wolves exist in this country, any real utopia would see to it there were eventually even more of them, and people are always going to live in close proximity to them. The "utopia" you speak of where 100% of guns could be banned without actually endangering people is an ecological nightmare.
@@Frommerman "Ban 100% of guns" is a strawman though. Nobody is advocating for the removal of literally all guns. It's about guns owned by random civilians. Of course hunters need guns. But "hunter" should be a state-accredited full-time job that exists to maintain the ecosystem, not a hobby where you kill animals for fun. You don't need a gun just because you live near wolves or bears, pepper spray will do.
A refreshing take. Thanks.
I recently had a bizarre back-and-forth on Mr. Beat's comment section for McDonald v Chicago. The pro-gun folks talked up Scalia's writings that gun control laws were historically implemented when less desirable minority groups started exploiting the more lenient laws. I read the McDonald decision a long time ago, and I don't readily recall this aspect of the opinion--probably because it did not especially impress me. After all, why would a strict, city wide hand gun law implemented by a democratically elected mayor and city council (who are often minorities) and applied equally to all residents, be unconstitutional. I mean apart for Heller precedent, which invented the individual right to bear arms the previous year. Why do historical instances where gun laws were drafted because of, or targeted at, minorities, have relevance to a public safety law today?
The post DC v Heller/McDonald v Chicago landscape is hardening, and we're sadly entering the arms race phase where minorities are getting in the game. Only more deaths will come of this.
That trans woman had a gun when she felt threatened. But, had the driver been armed, he could have shot her first and probably gotten away with it.
Rittenhouse shot and killed a man for less, then killed and maimed two more as he fled the scene and brave citizens tried to stop him.
What if those citizens had guns, and killed Rittenhouse after the first? They were good guys with guns after all, and as far as they knew Rittenhouse was an active shooter.
It took a highly publicized court case to determine Rittenhouse acted within the law, but might his killers have fared similarly? Rittenhouse was a vigilante for law and order. The people he shot were protestors for minority rights.
And what if none of the citizens had a gun but they kept pursuing him as he fled? How many good citizens trying but failing to end this murder spree could Rittenhouse have killed before the jury determined it was excessive? Five, ten, a hundred? What if the pursuers ran into Rittenhouse's confederates and there was a wholesale slaughter? Such a scenario is growing more likely every year, and gun proliferation is the biggest cause.
Last time I saw a gun it was within reach on a changing room floor (not my gun).
I live in TX where things are *extremely lax* but that's genuinely terrifying. You could have been a parent with a child in there. (Or anyone really. JFC at the very least the owner could have set it on the internal seat or where they kept "valuables")
Coming in on this at 48 seconds ago of posting I was all set to feel "oh no, Steve said some lib bullshit", but I kind of strongly agree. But I'd go even greater. While I'm not sure framing it as "there's no responsible gun owner" is right, especially since at its core a gun is a tool and many uses of guns are for hunting or fending off bears (although that isn't necessary and is a result of human settlement in animal habitats) you're right that the very existence of guns is the problem. But more than that, *purchasing* a gun is supporting these people. It supports these companies that are exploiting death and destruction.
But also I think a lot of leftists who view guns as necessary are often indulging in defensive fantasies. Most of the places you go are not going to want you to be carrying. I know I bought a knife specifically because I was going to Baltimore and I'd just read about a trans murder, but I had to ditch it when I visited any of DC's museums. Even going to the ER here in Portland I had to hide the knife behind a planter before the guard would let me in (though I was later told I could just have checked it). A lot of the time you're not going to be quickdrawing someone about to do a hate crime on you, either. And you certainly won't be able to pull out your trans flag AR or P90 in an Uber. Self defense like that is primarily only going to matter when the levy finally breaks and shit really hits the fan, not as often for defending against interpersonal violence.
Fellow Portlander here, I align with Steve, but I do like knowing leftists here have at least a semblance of a militia. I'm not about to be in it, but It seems to have done alright keeping the nazis away. It's impossible to say how many nazis they've drawn though. It's such a hard line to find of deterrence and making the problem worse (in many things, dealing with toxic people in communities, for example).
I'd argue purchasing a gun doesn't HAVE to support those companies: buy everything used from people disarming themselves; but, the reality is most people are going to go to a gun store, buy a new gun and a box of ammo.
@@DysiodeAlso... Look at the REAL history of the Union and workers movements in this country and around the world. From miners to factory workers people committed to the Rights and living conditions of workers all over the globe weapon in hand.
Workers everywhere should probably have some familiarity with guns because the ruling class for sure don't think twice about using them against us.
Having grown up in a non-gun owning country and only ever lived in such countries, i always find the gun discourse in the US fascinating in the way a car-crash is fascinating.
I'll bet that rideshare driver carries a gun now.
I thought about the marginalized communities with your first video. I agree with this. Gun ownership is wrong. Everyone must determine how much their exposure and engagement is with them for themselves. Just because I think it's wrobg does not mean anything. I'm in charge of no one and nothing.
That driver lost his job, if there's any justice at all in the world.
Yup, probably.
The next question though is, what really went wrong here:
The fact that she managed to get out of an abduction by happening to be armed.
(Lets be clear, it was an obvious illegal detainment, under threat of violence, with potential to move. abduction is not an exaggeration)
Or the fact that a person who (failed to) abduct someone (in public) can still buy a gun.
While I agree "Gun ownership is wrong"
I do feel we should be careful not to go into, "well she should have just cooperated with the abduction, as to not give him an excuse to get a gun"-territory.
I'm fairly certain that's not what you were saying.
And if the point was:
This was literally the best possible use-case for personal gun ownership,
and even this best scenario, made the problem of personal gun ownership worse.
(Can't think of a better argument against personal gun ownership than that)
Yeah, agreed, completely
Sitting in the driver's seat of a car (or front passenger seat) is only given an advantage with a gun if they're aiming forward. An armed person in the back seats almost always has the advantage in a draw down.
9:45 exactly.
Situations where personal gun ownership is the 'least bad' solution, should be seen as a condemnation of the situation.
(But indeed, we can work on solving more than 1 issue at a time)
I agree with Tom Morello "arm the homeless"
I trust ten million queer teenagers with guns more than I trust a single Republican with one.
This is one of those "holding two opposing ideas in mind at the same time" situations. Understanding the need for a gun in a particular circumstance, but also understanding the need to get rid of guns as a whole.
I don't think it's ever ethical to eat factory farmed meat. But for the last two years, I've been doing that. My health has improved tremendously (long story, but other health issues made good health impossible on a vegetarian diet). But I still believe it's fundamentally unethical.
In an unfair world, all of us have to balance kindness to others against kindness to ourselves and the safety of others against our own safety. There is no perfect solution in such an imperfect world.
So I think it makes sense to say, "There is no such thing as a responsible gun owner," while allowing that some people are/could be safer with a gun.
An example I go with on occasion in the same vein (though not the same severity):
I fully believe that eating at Chik-fil-A is harmful to lgbt folks (including myself).
However, I have a friend who is neurodivergent and has trouble eating many foods. For whatever reason, CFA sandwiches are one of few safe/same foods for them, so they occasionally eat there.
While I still believe that eating at CFA causes harm to myself and others, in their case, them getting nutrition into their body is more important/outweighs that concern.
Same same for marginalized folks who stay strapped for their safety.
Theres many recipes on the internet that can replaicate the same qualIty of food or better you can learn as an alternative to going to that restaurant.
@@MLBlue30tell me you don't understand what a same food is without telling me.
But does owning a gun actually decrease the overall odds of death or injury for marginalized people? I'm very skeptical. We know for a fact that gun owners overall are _more_ likely to get killed, and marginalized people are at increased risk of self-harm, which is one of the main factors that makes gun ownership risky to begin with.
yo. Am from Brazil. Loved the video and loved the “there is no responsoble gun owner” take (and graph). Everybody else in the world knows that the US has a guns problem.
While u guys have a universal constitutional right to hold guns. Here in Brazil we have a universal constitutional right to life and to health care. its sad to see everytime there is a shooting over there. Stay strong
Can we as foreigners (I'm European) judge the US for it? I mean, their system, while it does appear unusual to us and none of us would want to copy it, may have been necessary in their circumstances and their environment. I keep saying that the US trying to copy Europe (e.g. on healthcare) would end in disaster, just like how us copying the US will also end in disaster. Different societies, with different histories, demographics and cultures will require different policies to manage.
This was a great video. This is a question I've struggled with responding to so this is a great one.
One of the finest and honest commentaries on the state of affairs I've heard. Thank you for sharing as I believe you have the correct perspective on this. I enjoy your posts.
Boy is that a tough needle to thread, I feel like I learned something just listening, thanks for taking the time to share your thoughts.
this was an awesome follow up. thank you for making this.
You're so awesome Steve 💕! Much love for you and how you articulate yourself 😊
This reminds me of how Tom Morello, of Rage Against the Machine, has always, since the 90’s, played a guitar that has “Arm the homeless” written on it. An upperclass white 40 something will have a garage with a wall lined with various guns, and he’ll never need one of them. He’s less at risk of violence than any other group (except the super rich).
But the homeless, living in the margins, are in near constant danger. Though I also believe a primary reason he has that message is because society would be better if the haves were afraid of the have-nots.
I appreciate you seeing probable boundaries in terms of what you maybe can and can’t speak to, and your capacity for sharing an empathetic, informed perspective that reached exactly as far out beyond those boundaries as any wise person could and no further.
Policy-level standards are different than personal-level standards.
A very thoughtful video I'm going to have to digest a while.
Its appreciated Steve, keep up the good work
Fantastic video, btw!
It makes sense to me. Many members of marginalized groups are also more prone to depression, anxiety, and suicidal tendencies, and having a gun greatly increases the chances of such people ending their lives, which is one big reason I'll likely never have a gun, even for protection. The danger of suicide posed by firearms IMHO needs to be spoken of more in these conversations.
Thank you, again. You are a truly wonderful person.
I was frustrated there wasn’t this discussion in the original video. Thank you for this addendum; it’s important
Good analogy and pretty solid reasoning!
I’m a white, senior aged female and have been handling guns since I was seven years ago. Growing up in rural Pennsylvania, hunting for food was common and hunting animals is still a big part of the culture. Those who hunt but don’t eat the meat, donate it to food banks. I’d hunt if I was hungry enough. I’m lucky enough not to have to. I have inherited rifles. I’m glad to have firearms here in a sparsely populated area for self defense. I believe in strict gun controls, no semiautomatic, no high count magazines, legal recourse to sue and gun owners to be legally responsible for death and injury from guns they own.
To my mind, you’re the most thoughtful American commentator on UA-cam. Thank you Steve, please keep up the good work.
I still disagree, at least currently, that it is impossible to be a responsible gun owner.
That being said, your videos on the subject offer a well-argued pov on the subject, and I am glad you made them available.
It's always good to have a differing perspective to think about. Thank you for this.
You're a brilliant guy. Thank you! ❤
id say Malcom X was a responsible gun owner. did he tell us “by any votes necessary”? no he told us “We want freedom by any means necessary. We want justice by any means necessary. We want equality by any means necessary.” and “So I don't believe in violence-that's why I want to stop it. And you can’t stop it with love, not love of those things down there, no. So, we only mean vigorous action in self-defense, and that vigorous action we feel we're justified in initiating by any means necessary. Now, the press, behind something like that, they call us racist and people who are “violent in reverse.” This is how they psycho you. They make you think that if you try to stop the Klan from lynching you, you're practicing “violence in reverse.”
His father saved his family from the Klan because when they came for them, he had a gun.
6:15 - ‘Its not for me to say to a marginalised person that the way you got out out that potentially life threatening situation was the wrong way’
I respect and agree to the notion that there’s no such thing as responsible gun ownership, but this comment really struck me. I wondered if you literally meant any group or community who face discrimination or danger due to unequal power dynamics, because that would include women and children who - 9 times out of 10 - are at a significant biological strength disadvantage. Every hostile encounter with a man is a potentially life threatening situation.
And yet - according to a 2021 CDC report on homicides in the USA, men were four times more likely to be murdered than women. Unless the woman was age 75 or older - then she was twice as likely to be murdered than a man of the same age.
I think, what struck me, is *fear*. People feeling it. And we’re more understanding when that feeling is… recognised? When the threat/risk is agreed to be real and present?
Women and children are physically weaker and essentially powerless, respectively, compared to men.
Any attacker, from half the population, could be life threatening.
And yet, men are socially conditioned into the mould of soldier/protector/gangbanger, of authority and respect through physical strength and prowess in a way that women simply aren’t. They will be at higher risk of violence because of it (receiver or instigator or both) and being of roughly equal or greater strength doesn’t protect them from being murdered.
No wonder we’re all afraid.
No wonder we all want guns.
That’s why I think nobody should have guns. Frightened people with ranged weaponry is a disaster before you even consider malice, greed, opportunism, misunderstanding, reflex, revenge, radicalisation or serious mental health issues with hallucinations and other types of altered sense of reality.
At least with knives, a person can’t accidentally kill you from half a block away because their aim is shit, or murder a dozen strangers from a rooftop inside 10 seconds because whatever the fuck is wrong with them.
Solid follow up to the last video.
Personally, I've always had a bit of a problem with the framework that there is no ethical consumption under capitalism because it frames it as an absolute binary rather than a matter of degrees. To say that there is no perfectly ethical consumption under capitalism would be more accurate and also more hopeful in that it would allow us to aim for improvements in how ethical the system is overall. Similarly, there are grades of ethics involved in the ownership of guns even if we can agree that a gun culture proliferated to the point that there are more guns than people in the United States and a relatively irresponsible populace on the whole in possession of them is a bad thing.
I also have the issue that too many on the Left then use it as a dodge for personal responsibility.
Everyone should have access, because the alternative is that ONLY police have firearms, and as a queer person living in a conservative state in which Nazis protest, and as someone who is acutely aware of the tie between fascist paramilitaries and the government both in Germany in the 30's and in America right now, I will continue to own firearms and continue to teach and train fellow queer people in responsible ownership, storage, and usage.
No, not everyone should have access. There are people who are simply incapable of being able to do anything with a gun but hurt themselves or someone else.
People with impulse control and addictive personalities are also immediate concerns. Children owning guns that they're allowed to use and carry around unsupervised is a bad idea.
From the beginning the second amendment was never about being able to carry a loaded gun around 24/7 just because you want a phallic totem. It was about groups of responsible people who spend decent amounts of time making sure that when they are made to take up arms they can do so safely and effectively.
The "right" to individual carry with no restrictions was invented out of whole cloth by a revisionist supreme court using "original intent" as a cover.
Thank you, nicely said.
The possibility of ethical consumption under capitalism is as elusive as the possibility of expressing a nuanced opinion on social media (including UA-cam).
Great nuanced take!
I'm very progressive, Latino, and Dem voter. Here in Texas, we have a different relationship with firearms. Hunting, plinking, target practice, etc. I own many firearms, as i am a collector. I'm not violent, I am fanatical about gun safety. My kid is gay, and i fear bigots will want to harm him. So, im PRO gun, but i do want restrictions on the AR-15 , AK-47, and other semi auto rifles with high capacity mags.
I'm a black lady and I agree with Steve 1000%.
Nice, well said
Hi and Thank You Steve! Even when a person uses a gun to save themselves from a situation without firing a shot, they are still teaching other people that "Might Makes Right" and that to get their way, all they need is a gun to threaten other people.
Thank you.
Thank you
There is much that I disagree with you about, both politically and philosophically. But your short video here reminded me of the words of Robert Kennedy when he was told about the murder of Martin Luther King. "Let us dedicate ourselves to what the Greeks wrote so many years ago: to tame the savageness of man and make gentle the life of this world. Let us dedicate ourselves to that, and say a prayer for our country and for our people."
Guns aside, THANK YOU, STEVE, for being as outspoken as you are. I love when Everyday Joes are strongly vocal about difficult subjects that affect us all. Not only that you speak up but that you are passionate and often humorous in your delivery. You f$#%in' care about people and I love hearing that. Maybe... one day humanity will find its maturity. Until then keep it up, Steve!
Ty for not backing out on what you believe Steve
Retired US Marine here... I've seen an absurd amount of stupid accidents involving guns, including things that got people killed or shot. Like, really, REALLY dumb fucking shit that could have easily been avoided with half a second of thought. What really bothers me is that it was all done by "professionals," people who get paid for their ability to handle weapons, like Marines, soldiers and sailors.
I hate that our UA-cam personalities are more beholden to the court of public opinion and have thus learned to more eloquently explain every nuance of their principles, than what any of our politicians face.
That's a lot of words to say "I'm not your dad."
I kinda felt after watching the other video that something like this was coming. I do appreciate that Steve is always on the side of disagreeing with someone, but not discounting their lived experience, nor does he try to give permission for someone else's feeling developed from that experience. One of the worst things 'allies' try to do is validate a marginalized person's experience from a place of privilege and Steve doesn't do that.
I didn’t jump on you about the responsible gun ownership, because I don’t disagree with most of your issues & resolutions. My guns are providing 3 months worth of meat a year & are on hand should a bear or big cat come out of my woods into my yard and be posing a threat. I live 49 minutes from a 911 response at minimum.
I do not see any good reason for personal carry firearms, even in law enforcement. I see no reason for private ownership of automatic weapons. I think as much or more should be done to own a gun as to drive a car. I don’t have any issues with hunting or wildlife management gun use, but I would like to see higher standards towards this type of ownership & use.
I was raised with guns as a tool that was deadly & to exhaust every other option, before considering its use on a person. The last point was drilled in so completely that I have no issues increasing the laws surrounding guns at all. I do know many more people who are the same way on this issue.
So just please remember everyone, that owning a gun = being evil as much as being atheists = being the devil’s minion.
THANK YOU. I mentioned the hunting piece being a part of it and how yeah.... people do still hunt so they can eat. Rural food deserts are a thing. Wealth disparity is brutal and inflation is likewise punishing. But no, apparently having a gun is irresponsible? Nonsense.
There are very few people who actually think that there are zero uses for guns that are legitimate. The point is that the industry benefits from people being whipped into a frenzy and purchasing guns of all types because they feel less safe.
It doesn't matter that adding more guns to the mix increases the probability that they'll be used for further mass shootings. It makes people *feel* safe, and isn't that what really matters?(heavy sarcasm on that last sentence)
Steve I have watched your videos for many years now and every time you post something political I always find myself agreeing with you and these gun videos are the same. You are a great guy. Keep up the good work and keep speaking out there are people out here who are with you.
Generally agreed. One does not fix problems by contributing to another contrasting problem. It's still going in the wrong direction.
Hi Steve, I'm NOT a gun owner and never would be. There are several youtube videos about the Swiss. They had a shooting in 2002 and created legislation and havent had any problems since, ZERO shootings. And yet many Swiss own guns. Check it out, I still am not interested in owning a gun for myself. Love your work. Jim Oaxaca Mexico
Interesting point
Ty
Steve, did you just give us a fireside chat?
Good follow-up video Steve.
As a gun owner I couldn't really argue with your take on whether responsible gun owners exist. First, because it's a principle of yours and it's usually worthless to argue against principles; and second because I see where you came to that conclusion and it's a pretty solid road leading there.
For the gun owner line, I say: There is no such thing as a *perfectly* responsible gun owner. Negligent incidents with a firearm are a matter of *when*, not *if*. They will happen, the only question is when and how bad they'll be. Most of them end up benign; flagging someone with an unloaded weapon, leaving a round chambered but catching it the next time you handle the weapon, leaving the safety off while holstered, etc.
Also, there is no such thing as an *accident* with a firearm, there is only safe handling and negligence, no in between.
No amount of training can make someone truly safe with a gun. I was in the army for 15 years, 3 years in a drill sergeant unit, training people, helping run ranges. I spent 5 years in an MP unit, with people who were civilian police officers too. The number of negligent incidents I saw from "highly trained" and very experienced personnel in my time in the military (especially on deployment).
I spent years not owning a gun, but bought one for the first time in nearly a decade just before the previous election, just in case there was a wave of political violence. I understand marginalized people owning guns; it's a question of taking the lesser evil, the lesser danger. Is the danger of owning a gun (it's always dangerous to own a gun) less than the danger of potential situations where one would affect your safety or survival? If the odds of an incident combined with the lethality of the potential incidents higher than the chances of same with a gun in the home? If those answers skew the right way then it makes sense to own a gun. I have read too many names on Trans Day of Remembrance to tell any of my fellow trans folx that they shouldn't own a gun, even though I think we should eliminate them from our society in line with the actions of Australia and other modernized nations.
Of course, I typed all that in the first couple minutes of your video and you echoed the same, which should not have surprised me.
2nd Amendment lovers: Everyone should be able to have guns!
Black and LGBTQ folk: Ok cool!
2nd Amendment lovers: No not like that!!!!!!
I feel that you can be a responsible gun owner, as long as the guns are unloaded, the ammunition is locked up separately from the weapon, and separate keys for those secured boxes.
But I’m sure people will have a problem with securing firearms for some reason.
When i was 24 years old I lived in a very Blue state. I went through all the hoops and when I was on my way to get my permit their was a mass shooting. I have not been able to bring myself to get my permit because I have not been able to go in a window when I wasn't in the shadow of mass shooting. That was over 25 years ago.
There was a short science fiction story once in which the protagonist was taking the last hurdle before getting a driver's license. It consisted of an immersive video in which the protagonist ended up in a driving situation where he ended up killing a child. He thought it was just a last reminder to be careful and said he was ready to get his license but the video was actually the last test. Those who decided to wait and think it over or retrain before finishing the process got their license. Those who immediately brushed off such a horrific experience and continued their application were denied.
Personally responsible, socially irresponsible.
I work in a situation where a lot of people have to work together to make a space very nice for everyone. It only takes one person to decide to crap up the space by erecting something ugly. One person does it, then another person puts up walls to block their view of that person out, then someone doesn't like their neighbor's walls, and puts up walls of their own, and soon the whole area is just ugly barriers, with people operating in isolated, unwelcoming shoeboxes, alone. People complain about how the environment has become socially unwelcoming to new participants and casual exploration, and everyone is so immediately adversarial to visitors. And yet one person lowering their walls does nothing when everyone has walls up.
You can't really blame the last person who puts up walls in this scenario.. they just want their area to be nice, and they're surrounded by ugliness.
The walls have become the problem in this scenario.. and the original person who made something ugly.. they're long gone. But people won't pull their walls down til the next guy pulls his down.
The marginalized people feel they need guns, because so many other people, particularly their vocal oppressors, have them.. and their rhetoric (in the current LGBTQ example) is becoming particularly violent lately. The marginalized aren't going to get rid of theirs until their oppressors get rid of theirs. Unfortunately too many folks in this process have a programmed-into-them persecution complex.. so they think themselves as much a victim as the marginalized.
Not arguing, just chiming in to say you have subscribers, of which I am one, who are gun owners or do not disagree with gun ownership and use in all circumstances. I think the nuanced position that some people benefit from gun ownership and use, and the government should not prohibit gun ownership and use generally, because the benefits will sometimes outweigh the costs. This doesn't mean the costs will not hurt, but this is a discussion we should continue to have as a society and as voters, and a middle position (reasonable gun rights and reasonable gun restrictions) seems most logical to me.
thank you for this, steve.
I think the thing that escapes most people that have a gun “for their safety” is that it is an extremely false sense of security. But, it is a very difficult time, with very difficult questions. I find life isn’t much fun, because there is the constant background noise of crazy. But I am grateful to hear your words. You always speak well thought out ideas and observances,something to be appreciated so much in these times. And, I love your Star Trek commentary.
Damn, Steve, you busy
I wish we would treat gun deaths like automobile deaths. Cars used to not have seatbelts, airbags, etc. Car accidents were the leading cause of death for young people. They added tech to cars, and now they're safer.
Took decades waiting for unsafe cars to phase out, but they did.
We should add tech to guns. You can turn on your furnace with your phone these days.The tech is there for GPS enabled programmable guns that will not fire if the gun is, for example, at a school or held by anyone but the owner.
It would take a long time and wouldn't eliminate every tragedy. Like cars.
But no, we can't think outside the box or compromise! We have to stick to what we want and bicker while children and other innocents are slaughtered.
Steve, appreciate you sticking your neck out really respect you being a voice against this consensual insanity
Thanks for making this video, I have learned more about your opinion and I respect it. Take care
Hi Steve, I have been watching some of your videos, and I appreciate the nuance in topics like this. I also enjoy the Star Trek videos even though I am not a fan. Thank you for your work :)
I like to say, every firearm owner is responsible till they aren’t. Look at the stats. Most crimes commited with a firearm are commited by the owner or someone who lives with the owner. Followed by someone the owner knows.
It comes down to one word Respect
There are a lot more factors at play than "it's the guns" will ever be capable of addressing. I do agree that reducing gun ownership in the US is immensely important but I think it should be noted that the only succesful campaigns for gun control have been against marginalized people - and, if you were to really dig down into the beliefs of any 2A extremist, I'd be willing to bet that their actual belief in who should own guns are actually largely limited to white christian cis men.
The reason being that guns arent just guns. People use excuses like "its for safety" but the reality is that most gun owners own them because of the power they convey and no one wants to let go of that power.
The reality is that most gun owners are scared. Whether sensibly so (such as in the case of the LGBTQ+ community) or irrationally so (such as in the case of white 2A extremists) but we'll never get rid of guns - or the feeling of a need for guns (or, in the case of marginalized communities, the ACTUAL need for guns) until we solve the underlying cultural problems.
Ultimately, gun reform is an important step in reducing gun violence in the US but it has the potential to backfire (as it has in the past) and it's only one piece of a larger solution - a solution that requires signifigant changes to the way we operate our country.
Gun owners should be obligated to do ambulance ride alongs,to see the damage
this is a really refreshing take, honestly. ive always been a bit disturbed by the folks in leftist spaces who insist we HAVE to arm ourselves.
id never even dream of judging somebody for simply owning a gun, particularly someone whos part of a marginalized group. as the anecdote from a commenter's gf illustrated, sometimes being armed can be the difference between life or death in a dangerous situation. im thankful she was armed that day, and am thankful she made the choice to own/learn how to use a gun.
but owning a gun is ALWAYS a risk, and i wish the more pro-gun leftists would acknowledge that instead of just insisting every marginalized person should own a firearm. some folks may decide its a risk worth taking, and i respect that. its their safety and their choice. but it really bothers me when i see folks in trans groups im in, for example, insist every one of us NEED to arm ourselves, because if id had a gun even just a few years ago, i likely wouldnt be alive right now. id have made sure of it myself.
that being said, i do think its important to remember that there are also people like ranchers and those who hunt for food (particularly those in food deserts) who may find a gun necessary for reasons other than self-defense from other humans.
theres zero reason for anyone to own an AR-15/etc though. that one I'll stand by.