“Gun advocates are like anti-vaxxers: they believe their personal preferences should be allowed to create an unsafe environment for the rest of us.”
Note: if the person that said this wants credit, I will gladly add attribution.
“Gun advocates are like anti-vaxxers: they believe their personal preferences should be allowed to create an unsafe environment for the rest of us.”
Note: if the person that said this wants credit, I will gladly add attribution.
The real choice is between freedom or security. Highway crashes kill more people than guns or vaccine-preventable diseases, so why allow private citizens to drive thousands of pounds of steel capable of going 100 mph? And why should citizens be allowed to have access to gasoline, or acid, or any of the millions of other things that can be used for violence?
There is no disease on the planet I am so afraid of that I would want to compel others to submit to injecting something into their body regardless if it’s safe or not – that’s not my call to make for you, and hopefully not yours to make for me. (Otherwise, I’ll be the first to invest in drug companies, because they’ll have a field day)
“There is no disease on the planet I am so afraid of…”
Good for you Mr. I’d-Rather-Vitiate-The-Environment-For-Everybody A-hole, but the rest of us sane folks think differently.
Do you really think this kind of tone is going to convince anyone? Much less the person you were responding to? Calling someone an A-hole and insane, and a “vitiater” is not a way to put forward one’s point of view. Most people, I suspect would totally ignore you reply.