• rockSlayer@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    66
    ·
    1 month ago

    Well duh. The first rule of owning a firearm is making sure that it isn’t the first time you use it in the moment you need to use it

          • Fugtig Fisk
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            29
            ·
            edit-2
            1 month ago

            Calling an unloaded gun loaded, is not responsible. With peoples willingness to deduct dangerous theories, they will conclude that if a gun is loaded even when its not, then i can as well keep it loaded at all times.

              • RippleEffect@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                10
                ·
                1 month ago

                Specifically to prevent people from using a real gun as a toy or prop and blowing their or someone else’s brains out because they thought it was unloaded. Effectively to treat all guns as loaded, just in case they actually are.

            • vaultdweller013@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              5
              ·
              1 month ago

              The same things are taught for powertools and industrial machines. It has power even though it doesnt. Its so ya dont kill someone by being mistaken. Its safety 101 for anything that can be deceptively safe when in the hands of a person.

            • OneWomanCreamTeam@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              1 month ago

              It’s another way of saying “treat any gun as if it were loaded”. That’s pretty basic firearm safety. You’d be shocked how often people get shot because someone incorrectly assumed a gun was unloaded, and when a mistake could easily maime or kill someone it’s irresponsible to leave any room for error.

  • Thrillhouse@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    37
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    1 month ago

    I felt that this 60 minutes interview wasn’t fair AT ALL and heavily slanted toward calling the Harris/Walz campaign on the most trivial shit.

    For example, calling out Walz on the few times he’s misspoke and then asking how the voters can trust him.

    Fuck allllll the way off with that bush league line of goddamn questioning. It’s not comparing apples to apples to pretend Walz is some huge liar when Trump and Vance lie literally every time they open their mouths with egregious, dangerous and racist lies. It’s disingenuous and ridiculous “reporting”.

    Same with saying Harris’ plan would hurt the economy. Trump had Obama’s economy served up to him on a silver platter, tanked it (partial credit to Covid and the war in Ukraine as aggravating factors), and is pretending it’s all the Biden-Harris administration’s fault. Macroeconomically America is recovering from its recent economic downturn, similarly to Canada. Maybe, just maybe, the middle class is not feeling this because of wage suppression, corporate greed, price gouging and purposeful, weaponized incompetence by the Republicans in Congress.

    • ReallyActuallyFrankenstein@lemmynsfw.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      1 month ago

      Yeah…I thought ABC did great on the fact checking during the Harris debate. But in general, professional journalism is in a sad state.

      Feeding into the false equivalence by being “equally” challenging is a part of the sanewashing. Someone needs to tell these journalists that treating bad faith actors differently than good faith actors is desirable and doesn’t make you biased.

  • GiddyGap@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 month ago

    The fact that a candidate has to answer questions about their shooting experience in order to be qualified for the presidency says it all. This country is extremely messed up.

  • m0darn@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 month ago

    Seems pretty sexist to even ask.

    When was the last time trump shot a gun?

    • AdamEatsAss@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      28
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 month ago

      I don’t think anyone should need to own a gun. But I also don’t think owning a gun and talking about it makes you a “gun nut.”

        • vaultdweller013@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          1 month ago

          I dont own any functional firearms. I will talk about the Winchester Model 1897. But I will also talk about how the ford Pinto gets a bad wrap unprompted, so maybe ill just talk about random shit that way.

    • TipRing@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 month ago

      It’s strategy. Many American swing voters own guns, the Republican messaging is that Kamala will take all those guns away, so this ‘admission’ is intended to make it permissible for those on-the-fence gun owners to vote for her.

      Kamala has secret service protection, she will likely have security around her for the rest of her life. She doesn’t need to own a gun. This is just messaging and posturing to capture votes, please recognize it for what it is.

    • PyroNeurosis@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      16
      ·
      1 month ago

      You have the choice of a conservative who supports more guns, increased aid to Israel, and a more closed border.

      Or the party of Donald Trump.