you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] -2 points 3 years ago* (last edited 3 years ago) (6 children)

Their point is that there are accidental and intentional, even mass, shootings. I don't dispute this. I'm not even against reasonable gun control laws.

But this was supposed to be a discussion about understanding an American perspective. Not sarcastically deriding any attempt to do so.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 3 years ago (5 children)

    So then it wasn't shallow and dismissive at all, you just didn't appreciate the delivery. The points they made were perfectly valid and, ironically, calling them shallow and dismissing was itself shallow and dismissive. It just seems more like you used a bad analogy but can't take the criticism.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] -3 points 3 years ago (4 children)

    Except this isn't a debate on gun control.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 3 years ago (3 children)

    I'm so confused... you responded to a comment about guns and made an analogy for gun control.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] -2 points 3 years ago (2 children)

    What is something that makes no sense to Europeans?

    That whole gun thing

    It's analogous to modern encryption law controversies //<--me

    If you want to understand why it's so hard to pass strong gun laws in the USA, then reasoning by analogy to the contemporary issue of strong crypto may prove helpful.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments