zlacker

That was a gun rally. A gathering of people with literal killing machines. Seems somewhat different than a normal protest?

>>charle+(OP)
People in Minneapolis are throwing rocks and setting buildings on fire. That seems a lot more worse than people holding (but not threatening to use) weapons.

>>charle+(OP)
Not really. Any large gathering of angry people is dangerous (and especially capable of killing). No?

>>SpicyL+9
Who are you more afraid of - a dude holding a rock they might throw or a dude holding a gun that he could possibly fire?

Yeah, the gun. It is more likely to hurt you. It doesn't matter if folks are threatening to use it or not. The gun can, in general, do more bodily harm. Just because folks didn't use them doesn't mean it isn't a threat. Rocks at least have more purpose than to put holes in things - guns are there to kill other things even when used responsibly. Gun ranges are simply training for this.

>>nevera+i
I think this is a good point to throw out a reminder: danger is not binary. If it were binary all of these activities would be equivalent:

* taking a nap * eating a meal * riding a bicycle * playing Russian roulette

>>Broken+A3
I mean, I'm more afraid of the dudes who are throwing rocks, not merely holding them.

>>Broken+A3
Broken_Hippo says>"Rocks at least have more purpose than to put holes in things - guns are there to kill other things even when used responsibly. "

- Broken Hippo apparently hasn't been hit by a rock recently!8-) I joke, but...

We're speaking of men holding rocks. You underestimate the effectiveness of rocks as weapons. Every man knows how to use a rock as a weapon and almost everyone has thrown a rock or pounded something with a rock. You needn't throw a rock to kill/harm someone; it's likely faster and easier if you keep the rock in your hand.

Rocks have been used as weapons since before prehistoric times. Rocks have possibly been instruments of death for more of our ancestors than have bullets.

>>Broken+A3
I don't believe it is that rational. It's an ideological assessment, not a risk assessment.

If you agree with the people holding the guns, you feel safer with them. If you agree with the people holding the rock, you feel safer with them. It doesn't matter what they are holding.

>>nevera+i
It’s a lot easier to kill with a gun than without a gun.

>>charle+W81
Indeed it is! However, in the case of the Richmond, VA rally there was no violence. And the people that participated in the rally did so in accordance with the law.

>>sophac+af
What do any of these have to do with a large group of angry people?

>>charle+(OP)
I've seen multiple videos now from the recent riots of people being beaten either to death, or near death.

I didn't see anything like that from the 2A protests.