🎓 Dr. Freemo 🇳🇱 @freemo@social.cleverlibre.org

@Pat Nope, and please dont bring that up again or I will have to report you. No mine are about perfectly ordinary friendly birds that absolutely dont spy on you. In fact they are so obviously not spying that they are a perfect choice to tell all your secrets to!

@Pat No, actually i didnt read that post till you just linked it now.

@TruthSandwich

Yea, I mean, their views were disapointing to say the least. I just prefer to keep an open dialog with people is all, no reason you have to.

@TruthSandwich That is your right, though disengaging would have probably been just as effective. But no worries, whatever works for you. I cant argue with the fact that he had a disconnect with the technicals for sure.

@Amikke

Actually we have the same amount of hair follicals as our ancestors (chimpanzees)... our hair just isnt as noticable (not as dark or thick).. but thats another matter.

@thor

@Amikke

If it were not about age but rather about advantages of hairlessness then I think we would see naturally hairless adults, which is virtually nonexistant. The very fact that it strictly follows an age boundary I think makes a clear indication it is about age.

We also see this in other aspects, where child-like traits are selected for (such as women who are physically tiny).

@thor

@Amikke

To be fair I think it is completely valid to say that the human instinct to be attracted to hairlessness is completely a pre-historic hold-over from when cavemen used to rape women, and there was genetic pressure to prefer younger women... Now to say you are a pedophile if you like that is just wrong.. but I do think the sexual preference is absolutely tied in with prehistoric tendency towards pedophilia... this is just our way as a more evolved species to indulge in our primal preferences WITHOUT it actually being pedophilia. And we are so far removed from it I dont think anyone who has that preference is also a pedophile, I doubt the thought of small children even crosses their mind.

@thor

@mapto

You ignored my question.. we need a baseline to continue... Is #1 as listed above true or not?

If both people have a gun then they will be on equal footing... good thing the good guy/victim had a gun cause if they wouldnt they would be at a disavantage which is much worse.

How do you expect lawenforcement to replace the need to carry a gun? Do you expect someone trying to kill or rape you to wait while you call the police and have them come? Int he overwhelming majority of attacks you will never even have the chance to call the police, and the incident will be long over by the time they get there anyway.

@freepeoplesfreepress

@mapto

There are two angles to this, and perhaps you just presented yourself poorly:

1) Are there scenarios where a gun can, and have, saved lives

2) Are the cases of lives being saved outweighing the cases of lives lost

#2 is far mroe nuanced and I can understand if someone wants to engage in that discussion...

#1 is trivially obvious and if you question that, then it suggests your biases are so strong as to be futile.

Sounded like you were saying #1, but perhaps it was #2 and just worded poorly.

I assume you recognize a woman having a gun when being raped by a larger male could potentially save her life? I assume you also recognize that should someone want to kill you, having a gun could similarly potentially save your life? If so we have covered the trivial point at least.

@freepeoplesfreepress

Lol, for my #ant people ;)

This has been a PSA!

@slimtux That is a valid argument for concealing it rather than having it in the open (not sure back vs front makes a huge difference though)...

My holdster locks the gun in place so unless you know how to unlock it you cant just pull it out.

@freepeoplesfreepress

And I am glad you share them. I do not consider you anti-gun. As far as I can tell you want guns but feel the system needs some tweaking by having what you perceive to be some reasonable restrictions that dont exist (but havent expressed what those restrictions are).

I dont have enough information to disagree or agree with you. I know i lean pretty strongly towards fairly lax gun laws, so i tend to disagree with many in that regard, at least to some degree.

@mapto

@freepeoplesfreepress

I was responding to mapto not you (the first person in the list of people tagged is the person being responded to in a thread).

@mapto

@mapto @freepeoplesfreepress

If you cant see how a gun can prevent someone from killing or raping you, or bow hubting can prevent someone from starving then i dont know what to tell ya.

@tofugolem @georgetakei

Nah that sort of politicising i completely support.

@mapto

Thats the beauty of rights. If you dont like them you dont need to exercise them.

@Flatulenator

@mapto @freepeoplesfreepress oh and to answer your question the following nations are nations which explicitly declare the right to bare rights as a fundemental right:

Czech Republic, Guatemala, Ukraine, Mexico, the Philippines, the United States, Yemen, and Switzerland

@mapto @freepeoplesfreepress

Same reas9n you have whole areas of the world that will put people in jail for being gay.. propaganda, groupthink and brain washing.

When looked at objectively and in good faith (this part is lacking) I thi k any reasonable person woukd ubderstand its not about the right to kill people, its about the right to save lives, larticipate in a sport, hunt, and many other useful purposes.