This argument would make more sense if this free society wasn't the same society that would jail me for years for wanting to occasionally do some cocaine. As it stands, this is not a free society and this argument isn't one.

[–] RoadArchie@lemmy.ml 9 points 1 year ago (1 children)

What makes you a more free person? Much smaller risk of death and suicide or owning guns? Lol

[–] agitatedpotato@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Being able to choose either of those myself is unarguably the freest. The real question is the conflicting rights. If the right to own guns is conflicting with the right to life liberty and the persuit of happiness then we need to find a resolution. Legally speaking when two rights collide like this the they typically try and preserve as much of both rights as possible. Thats not what every gun control advocate wants though. Everyone has a different version of how it should shake out.

[–] Wirrvogel@feddit.de 8 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

That's where the gun culture comes in. America has none, they just have guns and no protective, strict culture of do's and don'ts around them. Not everything has to be restricted by law if a society decides that there are still rules. We have a social rule that when we sneeze or cough we put something in front of our mouth. It is not a law, but it is a healthy social rule that is helpful; everyone accepts that they are not free to sneeze in other people's faces. You need either gun laws or gun culture, Switzerland chose more culture, Germany more law, both work. America chose ... more guns and the "freedom" to shoot them in other people's faces. That's stupid and dangerous.