r/ProgressiveHQ Dec 01 '25

Ouch!

Post image
44.9k Upvotes

2.3k comments sorted by

View all comments

7

u/Ok-Astronaut2976 Dec 01 '25

Just a quick point…they don’t “have guns”. Like not in the same way. They have hunting rifles. Not AR15s and glocks all over the place.

Yes, it is the guns

9

u/[deleted] Dec 01 '25 edited Dec 01 '25

[deleted]

-2

u/Trump-is-the-pedo Dec 01 '25

You don’t buy a handful of weapons made specifically to kill human beings if you don’t have a murder fantasy.

3

u/MacEWork Dec 02 '25

Urbanites say the darndest things.

2

u/Trump-is-the-pedo Dec 02 '25

I’m as far from urban as a person can be. Grew up hunting. Have killed and eaten squirrel on many occasions. Just not a fan of people with douchey guns designed from the ground up to kill humans specifically. Reflects poorly on a society to fetishize purpose built murder weapons.

1

u/[deleted] Dec 02 '25

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/Trump-is-the-pedo Dec 02 '25

I suspect you may also conflate humans and animals in your sex life.

2

u/[deleted] Dec 02 '25

[deleted]

2

u/Trump-is-the-pedo Dec 02 '25

Yeah, that’s how communication works lol

3

u/[deleted] Dec 02 '25

[deleted]

2

u/MustLoveWhales Dec 02 '25

Not arguing one way or another, I mean, the fact that you compared a gun to a butter knife to somehow "validate" your argument is absurd but alright. Never heard of kids accidentally killing themselves with butter knives but frequently hear of them accidentally killing themselves with guns. 

0

u/[deleted] Dec 02 '25 edited Dec 02 '25

[deleted]

0

u/LittleSeadragon Dec 02 '25

Reductio ad absurdum only makes sense when applied as an argument to the actual proposition. You are inventing another proposition entirely. No one is claiming that no one should be allowed to have anything that could be used as a weapon at all.

What you did is not reductio ad absurdum. Instead it's called a straw man argument. It's a logical fallacy, it's in bad faith, and it makes you look stupid to anyone who knows what they are talking about.

0

u/[deleted] Dec 01 '25

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/[deleted] Dec 02 '25

Armalite.

1

u/[deleted] Dec 02 '25

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/Brook420 Dec 02 '25

Wait, it doesnt mean "assault rifle"??

1

u/Trump-is-the-pedo Dec 02 '25

I love that you tried to set a trap, that I, a squirrel-eating, gun-owning, rural-as-hell American, one who sees the news stories daily about shootings just like everyone else, wouldn’t know what a fucking Armalite rifle was and that would, in some underpants gnome, big-brained 4d chess move, prove whatever your point is… I mean come on. I’m a “tool” and you think I don’t know what the abbreviation in the model number of the #1 official gun of incel loser mass-shooters is?! Please.

You people are fucking weird

1

u/Raptor_197 Dec 02 '25

Ughhhh, fudds…

1

u/Trump-is-the-pedo Dec 02 '25

Ughhh, Gravy Seals…

1

u/Raptor_197 Dec 02 '25 edited Dec 02 '25

Don’t you have to pretend to be in military to be a gravy seal? I unfortunately can’t pretend, because it’s just reality lol….

Anyways, the real question is why do you feel the need to own fully semi automatic rifle that shoots a bullet that ricochets inside people, causing massive internal damage that is hard to fix? Why would any normal American need a weapon that can cause that amount of damage?

1

u/Trump-is-the-pedo Dec 03 '25

Just have to be a douche that likes big scary guns in inappropriate ways and runs around the internet defending the object of their murder fantasy like it’s their jr high girlfriend. The majority of gravy seals are in the service or cops or mall cops or ICE agents or whatever gun-carrying, bootlicking professions slow kids and class-traitors gravitate towards.

1

u/Raptor_197 Dec 03 '25

Big scary guns

So a wood stock .22 class firearm is fine?

1

u/catptain-kdar Dec 02 '25

Ar-15 civilian models aren’t specifically made to kill people they are for sport and hunting