236
submitted 22 hours ago* (last edited 22 hours ago) by Emmie@lemm.ee to c/unpopularopinion@lemmy.world

I hate people who treat them like some toys and fantasize about them. That makes me think they are in some sort of death cult. That they found socially acceptable way to love violence.

I would still get one for safety but it is a tool made for specifically one thing. To pierce the skin and rip through the inner organs of a person.

They can serve a good purpose but they are fundamentally grim tools of pain and suffering. They shouldn’t be celebrated and glorified in their own right, that is sick. They can be used to preserve something precious but at a price to pay.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] endeavor@sopuli.xyz 6 points 1 hour ago

Guns are made to make a tiny piece of metal go very fast. You don't have to use them to kill or think about using them to kill. You can, for example, use them as a remote light switch or their most popular use: remote hole punch. Healthy society shouldn't have to ban guns since they would be used for completrly non violent things, same a swords and bows.

I mean you could shoot at the sun to combat global warming even.

[-] colourlessidea@sopuli.xyz 2 points 18 minutes ago

I can only hope that this is satire

[-] Actionschnils@feddit.org 4 points 2 hours ago

Here in Germany this is a quite popular Opinion. If you have an open fascination for guns, you will be looket at like a serial killer or someone who will be going amok. And wont be allowed to be a police officer (the almost only people to wield a gun in public)

[-] Noel_Skum@sh.itjust.works 12 points 7 hours ago

I’m gonna go out on a limb here and guess you live in the US - well, I sure hope you do.

In the US I believe that guns are like pick-up trucks: far more people own them to plug gaps in their personality than the number of people who own them because they need their utility.

My personal view - and a generally held one - is that guns are a tool and to fetishise a tool is… weird; and suggests to me a troubled mind.

[-] czardestructo@lemmy.world 3 points 1 hour ago

You've never shot one and you're trying to rationalize it,eh? They're simply a lot of fun to understand mechanically and to use. I have mine for home defense and fun, nothing more. No fetish, no mental problems, I hardly even think about them. They're simply an impractical tool.

[-] Noel_Skum@sh.itjust.works 1 points 39 minutes ago

I use guns. I use a lot of other tools, too. My chainsaw doesn’t define my personality, so why would a gun?

[-] czardestructo@lemmy.world 1 points 35 minutes ago

See I think that's where you're getting lost. Most gun owners are not defined by their guns. They just own them and mind their own business. You're seeing all gun owners as those military cosplaying scared little boys that put bullets all over their trucks with gun maker stickers to let the world know they really like guns. The vast majority of gun owners are not tools owning tools.

[-] Noel_Skum@sh.itjust.works 1 points 19 minutes ago

Uh, that’s essentially what my first comment is saying… that’s why I assumed the poster was from over in the US - the rest of the world ain’t really like that. The vast majority of gun owners across the world are normal people; who just happen to own guns, amongst other possessions.

[-] Teppichbrand@feddit.org 2 points 1 hour ago* (last edited 1 hour ago)

High five! I just build a gas chamber in my basement. It's simply a lot of fun to understand mechanically and sit in, valves not turned on of course. ;) I have mine for home defense and fun, nothing more. No fetish, no mental problems, I hardly even think about the gas chamber I build in my basement. It's just nice to have.

[-] Dallimjp@sh.itjust.works 3 points 6 hours ago

God made man. Samuel Colt made him equal.

Any tool used incorrectly is a significant danger.

I already found the ideas and the people who hold those ideas that you're referencing are a minority who are scared fanatic and unreasonable and those are the type of people that should not have guns or tools of any capacity.

However, someone like you who wants one for protection and the ability to protect those around you regardless of circumstance are why it's important to protect gun rights in my opinion.

[-] Tudsamfa@lemmy.world 9 points 8 hours ago

I would have considered this the popular opinion, but it seems I'm the odd one out. The comments here defending it are hard to read.

Like, Farmers and Hunters: You know you are like 8% of the population at most, right? Killing animals should have maybe been mentioned as an alternative use for guns, sure, but come on: most gun nuts, as most people in general, are city folk. They buy a gun to shoot or threaten to shoot people exclusively.

[-] sudoshakes@reddthat.com 5 points 5 hours ago

Couple things.

First, firearms are used for sporting and competition of marksmanship by millions of Americans, and Europeans.

IPSC / USPSA are massively popular and all you ever do is put holes in paper or hit steel targets. The gear is purpose designed explicitly for this. So is the ammunition. Even down to the holsters and mag pouches. It’s ALL for the game of the sport.

The civilian marksmanship program is again, millions of Americans across many cities nation wide. A rifle designed to shoot a Palma match, or an F-class match, or benchrest rifles are specific to those disciplines. Nothing about a 37 lb sled riding benchrest rifle is designed to harm a person. It’s a purpose built tool for competition where mostly old people drive them with dials on a sled and put small groups on paper far away. They often don’t even get shouldered.

Sporting clays, variations of this are Olympic sports. There is no possible way to say an over under shotgun has been designed from the ground up for harming people. It’s a tool built around the rules of the sport. 2 shotgun shells. That’s all it can hold and is long as hell with a massive choke on it to control spread of small pellets precisely, pellets that are very bad at killing. Birdshot is almost never lethal past extremely short ranges and they are engaging clays at 40-80 yards.

PRS competitions are bolt action rifles with physical exercise and difficult physical stages under time pressure to shoot steel. Most have transitioned away from high energy calibers, like military chosen caliber that are for imparting energy into a target, and to small bullets you can watch trace in the scope for… you guess it, the specifics of the sport.

.22 long rifle is extremely popular in sports speaking of small cartridges. It’s what we use in Olympic competitions and bi-athalons that ski and shoot bolt action rifles. We use it in small bore pistol and rifle matches the world over. It’s terrible at killing a person, but is great for target use at 10 meters. Which is what the Olympics world over do.

I could go on and on with more examples. Firearms are just not used for killing things. They have in many countries beyond the US, a strong and friendly competition community for sport that only sees paper hole punching. The UK had a thriving and popular rifle community. France, Sweden, Finland, and Italy have thriving sporting gun competition cultures as well.

I live in a city of 2.5 million people in it and he surrounding area. I shoot every weekend for sport, as I have done since I was on a shooting team in high school, run by my high school. I won a junior olympic medal in that team. I love the engineering and competition elements of the sports and would highly encourage you to try one to see if your view might be expanded to see how kind and friendly the sports are to anyone new coming to try them.

[-] missandry351@lemmings.world 5 points 9 hours ago

That’s not an impopular opinion, that’s the opinion of normal people, firearms are not toys, unless you are in murica of course; then it’s like a Barbie, you buy the Barbie itself and then collect all the accessories

[-] Wooki@lemmy.world 11 points 13 hours ago

No, only some are and even then it's not broadly accurate, it's closer to Anthropomorphism.

Weapons are designed from the ground up to kill animals. From birdshot 10g shotgun to bolt action plastic tip single shot rifle.

Assault rifles are a category designed primarily to kill humans

[-] Jamablaya@lemmy.world 1 points 6 hours ago

Most people don't seem to realize the perfect deer rifle is the perfect human rifle.

[-] Wooki@lemmy.world 1 points 5 hours ago
[-] uniquethrowagay@feddit.org 5 points 10 hours ago

Killing animals is pretty shitty as well though

[-] BigTurkeyLove@lemmy.world 47 points 18 hours ago

I'm about as left as they come but weirdly enough I'm also a hunter, and I have to disagree, the guns I own are tools designed for specific purposes that aren't killing humans. Hunting turkey, hunting deer, hunting duck, I even have a muzzleloader for that season, and a gun for back packing and hunting out of a saddle in a tree.

Hunting IMO is way more sustainable and ethical than buying store bought meat and it connects me with nature and let's me first hand observe, appreciate, value, and want to protect ecology of my area.

[-] dx1@lemmy.world 3 points 6 hours ago

Killing animals isn't ethical. Inevitably the false dilemma gets painted between killing them or overpopulation, but the overpopulation is also a human-created problem, both through overdevelopment and killing off natural predators - the actual antidote is to scale back our development and reintroduce predators. Plant-based/vegan diet is far more ethical (nonsense about "plants feel pain", "mice killed by plows", "I can't eat vegan because of my blood type" and other vegan bingo card BS aside).

[-] sik0fewl@lemmy.ca 2 points 6 hours ago

How is hunting sustainable? It's currently sustainable because a small number of people do it. I can't see how it would be more sustainable than farmed, storebought meat.

[-] 000999@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 3 hours ago* (last edited 3 hours ago)

From what I understand, it's sustainable because hunters kill overpopulated species like deer. The deer become overpopulated due to lack of predators in the area and end up damaging the ecosystem by eating all the plants

[-] oo1@lemmings.world 1 points 2 hours ago

It might be if all the humans not hunting their meat starved to death - orwere never born. I think it really depends on what counterfactual you want to dream up.

You could argue that modern farming techniques created the agricultural surplus and enbled population growth and urbanisation and maybe helped the human population to grow to a level that hunter gatherers woud not be likely to have reached.

I think it is the scale of human population that is challenges sustainability of any tech, either method would be sustainable at some scale. I'm not convinced that modern farming practices are very sustainable for 10+bn people , for all that long. But I guess we'll see.

Over the long term i think hunter gathering humans were around a lot longer than farmers have been, and a much much longer than modern intnsive monocultural/ pesticide / fertilizer based methods. So you'd have to wait a few thousand years to know how sustainable modern farming is.

[-] tcgoetz@lemmy.world 62 points 20 hours ago

This seems like a very urban viewpoint. There are still places in the world and in the US in particular where a firearm is tool for safety that has nothing to do with other humans.

[-] earphone843@sh.itjust.works 30 points 20 hours ago

Not to mention hunting is a thing.

[-] yesman@lemmy.world 7 points 18 hours ago

No, it's just that rural people expect their opinions to count more, as though their lifestyles are more authentic or honorable.

And where exactly is it that a firearm is necessary to protect from wildlife? Kodiak Island?

As far as the safety argument goes, let's examine Police. The number one cause of "in the line of duty" fatalities is auto accidents, the second is heart disease, with COVID jockeying for position. If guns were a prophylactic, you'd expect them to shoot cheeseburgers and their cruisers. But as Richard Pryor observed: "Cops don't kill cars..."

load more comments (5 replies)
[-] WarlockLawyer@lemmy.world 70 points 22 hours ago

Gotta resist fascism somehow

You already had a coup and nobody is using guns to stop it.

load more comments (18 replies)
[-] Scott_of_the_Arctic@lemmy.world 13 points 17 hours ago

It's a very American viewpoint. Many countries in Europe have high gun ownership and manage to do so without murdering eachother.

[-] Tudsamfa@lemmy.world 5 points 10 hours ago

That is a very American excuse. The US has 120 guns per 100 people, Europe's highest, Serbia, which had a literal civil war not 2 decades ago, has 40.

The US has a gun problem.

[-] Scott_of_the_Arctic@lemmy.world 2 points 9 hours ago

I actually know a few Serbs personally and the 40 guns per 100 people definitely refers to legally acquired and nationally registered guns. And doesn't include the Kalashnikovs picked up after the war and kept by people's grandmother's.

Honestly I don't even see guns as a terribly effective method of mass murder. If I were to want to take out a large number of people, I'd use a Timothy McVeigh style truck bomb. Fertiliser and diesel are comparatively cheap in any country. Or you know I could just grab a kitchen knife and probably take out around a fair number of people.

The difference is that Americans have a hard-on for violence. America has a serious mental health problem. You just elected litteral fascists to the Whitehouse to stop trans girls from taking a shit in a public bathroom, so don't pretend that y'all are mentally healthy.

[-] Greg@lemmy.ca 30 points 20 hours ago

it is a tool made for specifically one thing. To pierce the skin and rip through the inner organs of a person.

This isn’t true. I live in a country with sensible gun control laws and live on a rural property with 10 acres of forest. We have a small rifle to protect the wildlife against rabies or to put down an injured animal.

The US conversation around guns is toxic.

[-] Valmond@lemmy.world 10 points 17 hours ago

That's not an unpopular opinion IMO.

[-] Ceedoestrees@lemmy.world 17 points 19 hours ago

If I can get excited for a cordless Bosch track saw, I can get excited for a nice gun. Guns have served two purposes in my life - target shooting with friends and the meat I get from hunting. I don't need to take on someone elses trauma and stop enjoying something to respect what they are.

[-] Delphia@lemmy.world 3 points 6 hours ago

I live in Australia and I theoretically love guns. I love them from an engineering and design point of view. Going shooting inanimate objects and making a skill based sport out of it looks like enormous fun. But my country has very strict gun control laws so owning one isnt worth the headaches.

But then I'm at the 24hr supermarket near the sketchy neighbourhood and the junkie is screaming at the cashier about something and I am so fucking happy that the likelihood of that guy having a gun is next to zero that I think "Yep, I'll take that trade"

[-] ricecake@sh.itjust.works 9 points 18 hours ago

I don't think that's an unpopular opinion, although I'd detach the violence from people.

Guns are weapons specifically designed as tools of violence. Some are for designed with animal hunting in mind, some for hurting people, and some for target sports, which are ultimately derived from the other two.

Like any tool, how people intend to use it matters, as well as how they expect to use it and how they prepare to use it.
I will easily judge people based on those factors.
Separating the tool from the use also lets us be a little more objective in our discussions about how we want to regulate the tool. "This type of weapon poses an undue risk to surrounding people in this context, so you can't have it in this context".

I think just about every gun owner I've met agrees with the sentiment if you get rid of the "against people" part.

[-] disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world 21 points 21 hours ago

They are engineered from the ground up to take lives ~~of other people~~.

I have no love for guns, but hunting for food is the reason humans created weapons in the first place. To your point, I’m pretty sure slaughterhouses aren’t using fully automatic rifles on the killing floor.

load more comments (6 replies)
[-] otacon239@lemmy.world 21 points 22 hours ago

I’ve always looked at them from a utility/engineering/sport perspective. I have no intent of ever carrying a weapon, but the training it takes to learn how to target practice, and the engineering that goes into them are incredibly fascinating.

I don’t encourage people to own guns and I don’t have any myself, but I really wish target practice didn’t have to share a platform with a killing machine.

load more comments (5 replies)
[-] _____@lemm.ee 8 points 18 hours ago

I've played shooter games since a kid and I've never wanted to own a gun. it's 100% a special kind of brainrot/power trip to want to hold and own deadly weapons and you won't convince me otherwise

yes hunting is a thing, I promise you the vast majority of American gun owners are not hunters.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 07 Feb 2025
236 points (100.0% liked)

Unpopular Opinion

6568 readers
524 users here now

Welcome to the Unpopular Opinion community!


How voting works:

Vote the opposite of the norm.


If you agree that the opinion is unpopular give it an arrow up. If it's something that's widely accepted, give it an arrow down.



Guidelines:

Tag your post, if possible (not required)


  • If your post is a "General" unpopular opinion, start the subject with [GENERAL].
  • If it is a Lemmy-specific unpopular opinion, start it with [LEMMY].


Rules:

1. NO POLITICS


Politics is everywhere. Let's make this about [general] and [lemmy] - specific topics, and keep politics out of it.


2. Be civil.


Disagreements happen, but that doesn’t provide the right to personally attack others. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Please also refrain from gatekeeping others' opinions.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Shitposts and memes are allowed but...


Only until they prove to be a problem. They can and will be removed at moderator discretion.


5. No trolling.


This shouldn't need an explanation. If your post or comment is made just to get a rise with no real value, it will be removed. You do this too often, you will get a vacation to touch grass, away from this community for 1 or more days. Repeat offenses will result in a perma-ban.



Instance-wide rules always apply. https://legal.lemmy.world/tos/

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS