this post was submitted on 07 Feb 2025
115 points (75.3% liked)

Unpopular Opinion

6568 readers
561 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
 

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
[–] Wooki@lemmy.world 7 points 2 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

[–] Majorllama@lemmy.world 8 points 4 hours ago

I mean... Technically they were engineered from the ground up to send a small projectile as far as possible using a chemical reaction.

It just so happens that humans are really sensitive to projectiles hitting them at high speed being made out of mostly water and mush.

Also there are many far north towns all around the world where it's almost mandatory to carry a high powered rifle with you at all times because polar bears will rip your arms off just for the hell of it.

[–] BigTurkeyLove@lemmy.world 40 points 7 hours ago (5 children)

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.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] Scott_of_the_Arctic@lemmy.world 9 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

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

[–] corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca 4 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

Many countries in Europe have high gun ownership and manage to do so without murdering [each other].

But can we agree that the not killing is a by-product of not using the gun, instead of using the gun? To re-phrase, the more the gun is used to shoot at something, the higher the chance of something getting hit?

[–] JohnEdwa@sopuli.xyz 2 points 4 hours ago

Accidents happen, there's no denying that, but that applies to literally everything that exists. Not setting your house on fire is a byproduct of not using candles, doesn't mean their purpose is arson.

I personally have zero desire to hurt or kill anyone, human or animal (so much so I deliberately avoided the mandatory military conscription of Finland) but I really like target shooting. Most of the time I do it with air pistols/rifles because I can use them on my back yard, but the bows, crossbows and firearms I own are strictly for that exact same purpose as well.

[–] Maalus@lemmy.world 1 points 4 hours ago

You are exactly the person that shouldn't get a gun.

[–] tcgoetz@lemmy.world 49 points 10 hours ago (8 children)

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 24 points 10 hours ago (7 children)

Not to mention hunting is a thing.

load more comments (7 replies)
load more comments (7 replies)
[–] Valmond@lemmy.world 6 points 6 hours ago

That's not an unpopular opinion IMO.

[–] Ceedoestrees@lemmy.world 17 points 9 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.

[–] Greg@lemmy.ca 26 points 10 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.

[–] WarlockLawyer@lemmy.world 53 points 11 hours ago (18 children)

Gotta resist fascism somehow

load more comments (18 replies)
[–] ricecake@sh.itjust.works 7 points 7 hours ago (2 children)

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.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] sp3tr4l@lemmy.zip 3 points 7 hours ago (10 children)
load more comments (10 replies)
[–] disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world 17 points 11 hours ago (6 children)

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 19 points 11 hours ago (5 children)

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)
[–] SocialMediaRefugee@lemmy.world 2 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

Gun fanatics always talk about stopping an evil government but we clearly see they have no intention of doing that, instead I just see them used to slaughter innocent people on a regular basis.

[–] Emmie@lemm.ee 1 points 5 hours ago* (last edited 5 hours ago)

That’s just power fantasy, it doesn’t matter who is on the receiving end as long as they are the good guys

But to be clear I talk about some very specific breed. You can have a gun and not be a nutjob. It isn’t that rare though for someone to have this righteous fantasy

load more comments
view more: next ›