Should Authoritarian Socialists be Pro Gun

[Telconi]

I highly doubt we will ever fully eradicate the need for arms, as we will always have a need for self-defense as long as crime remains.

Eradicate the need for crime.

Probably better than it would have if there were no guns.

No. For one thing, no gang wars.

Crime exists due to desires inherent to the human condition, you could never put an end to this.

[Kowani]

Eradicate the need for crime.

No. For one thing, no gang wars.

Crime exists due to desires inherent to the human condition, you could never put an end to this.

No, but I can definitely reduce the material circumstances that lead to it, and help break the cycle of poverty, which in turn vastly reduces violence.

[Telconi]

Crime exists due to desires inherent to the human condition, you could never put an end to this.

No, but I can definitely reduce the material circumstances that lead to it, and help break the cycle of poverty, which in turn vastly reduces violence.

Unlikely, material inequality is inevitable. Also, it's statistically dubious that homicide results from material inadequacies.

[The Xenopolis Confederation]

But the number of overall crimes and the damage done will drop radically.

Drop radically from what?

And this they would be far less devastating.

Fair point.

[Kowani]

No, but I can definitely reduce the material circumstances that lead to it, and help break the cycle of poverty, which in turn vastly reduces violence.

Unlikely, material inequality is inevitable. Also, it's statistically dubious that homicide results from material inadequacies.

I’m working from a post-capitalist framework with a world government. Obviously, this couldn’t be done on a national level without solely arming the state, which, while fine in theory, is not so much in practice. Poverty isn’t exactly the most pressing of concerns here.

But the number of overall crimes and the damage done will drop radically.

Drop radically from what?

See my response to Telconi. Gradual reduction with an eye towards as close to elimination as possible of poverty (because material scarcity is still a thing) does tend to drop violent crimes.

[Telconi]

Unlikely, material inequality is inevitable. Also, it's statistically dubious that homicide results from material inadequacies.

I’m working from a post-capitalist framework with a world government. Obviously, this couldn’t be done on a national level without solely arming the state, which, while fine in theory, is not so much in practice. Poverty isn’t exactly the most pressing of concerns here.

Drop radically from what?

See my response to Telconi. Gradual reduction with an eye towards as close to elimination as possible of poverty (because material scarcity is still a thing) does tend to drop violent crimes.

Post capitalist world governments don't make Bob not want to kill John because Sally slept with him.

[The Chuck]

Give every Tom, Dick, and Harry a rifle and ammunition. I may not agree with your politics but dammit, we're free to disagree and it never hurts to be ready for when the man comes around.

[Kowani]

I’m working from a post-capitalist framework with a world government. Obviously, this couldn’t be done on a national level without solely arming the state, which, while fine in theory, is not so much in practice. Poverty isn’t exactly the most pressing of concerns here.


See my response to Telconi. Gradual reduction with an eye towards as close to elimination as possible of poverty (because material scarcity is still a thing) does tend to drop violent crimes.

Post capitalist world governments don't make Bob not want to kill John because Sally slept with him.

No, but they do make Mutafa not want to kill Nbambe because he doesn’t have any food.

[Telconi]

Post capitalist world governments don't make Bob not want to kill John because Sally slept with him.

No, but they do make Mutafa not want to kill Nbambe because he doesn’t have any food.

No, now he kills Nbambe because he doesn't have a cool stereo. The driving force of criminal robbery is desire, not need.

[Kowani]

No, but they do make Mutafa not want to kill Nbambe because he doesn’t have any food.

No, now he kills Nbambe because he doesn't have a cool stereo. The driving force of criminal robbery is desire, not need.

Yes, this is why efforts to reduce poverty never drive down crime. At that point, Mutafa has things to lose that are worth more than a stereo, if he has no food, he has nothing to lose. Desire is not just a one-way street.

[Saranidia]

I’m working from a post-capitalist framework with a world government. Obviously, this couldn’t be done on a national level without solely arming the state, which, while fine in theory, is not so much in practice. Poverty isn’t exactly the most pressing of concerns here.


See my response to Telconi. Gradual reduction with an eye towards as close to elimination as possible of poverty (because material scarcity is still a thing) does tend to drop violent crimes.

Post capitalist world governments don't make Bob not want to kill John because Sally slept with him.

In what way does Bob have an exclusive claim to Sally? Is he her husband?

[The Xenopolis Confederation]

Post capitalist world governments don't make Bob not want to kill John because Sally slept with him.

In what way does Bob have an exclusive claim to Sally? Is he her husband?

He doesn't, but murderers aren't rational.

[Saranidia]

In what way does Bob have an exclusive claim to Sally? Is he her husband?

He doesn't, but murderers aren't rational.

Ok but from what I have read a lot of murders like that are about infidelity(the Incel murders and such being more rare), maybe I am wrong?

But if he has no exclusive claim then there doesn't seem to be any mitigating factors(save perhaps he is in insane).

An Islamic government would mean that would be unlikely to happen for various reasons:
mental healthcare being seen as a duty of the state

Him realising he is killing an innocent man
Etc. etc.

[The Xenopolis Confederation]

He doesn't, but murderers aren't rational.

Ok but from what I have read a lot of murders like that are about infidelity(the Incel murders and such being more rare), maybe I am wrong?

But if he has no exclusive claim then there doesn't seem to be any mitigating factors(save perhaps he is in insane).

An Islamic government would mean that would be unlikely to happen for various reasons:
mental healthcare being seen as a duty of the state

Him realising he is killing an innocent man
Etc. etc.

He is insane.

[Saranidia]

Ok but from what I have read a lot of murders like that are about infidelity(the Incel murders and such being more rare), maybe I am wrong?

But if he has no exclusive claim then there doesn't seem to be any mitigating factors(save perhaps he is in insane).

An Islamic government would mean that would be unlikely to happen for various reasons:
mental healthcare being seen as a duty of the state

Him realising he is killing an innocent man
Etc. etc.

He is insane.

Well socialists tend to support universal healthcare which includes mental health.
Also mental illness, like physical illness, doesn't exist in a socioeconomic vacuum.

[Aclion]

Post capitalist world governments don't make Bob not want to kill John because Sally slept with him.

No, but they do make Mutafa not want to kill Nbambe because he doesn’t have any food.

If only because Nbambe doesn't have any food either.

[Washington Resistance Army]

It's farcical, and tbh exceedingly dangerous, to assume the world will ever be safe. As long as two different people exist there's a chance one will try to harm the other for whatever reason.

And if they both have guns, then the chance of serious harm goes up.

As does the possibility of effective self defense.

[Saranidia]

Post capitalist world governments don't make Bob not want to kill John because Sally slept with him.

No, but they do make Mutafa not want to kill Nbambe because he doesn’t have any food.

True but then again whilst that does almost complete abolish the desire for robbery-motivated homicide(a statistically significant type in many countries), there will still be the occasional sexually sadistic, domestic dispute based or revenge motivated homicide.

[Thermodolia]

Completely impossible. Twisted people will always exist.

But the number of overall crimes and the damage done will drop radically.

There would still be gang wars. They just wouldn't use guns.

And this they would be far less devastating.

Knife attacks aren’t less devastating

[Thermodolia]

Crime exists due to desires inherent to the human condition, you could never put an end to this.

No, but I can definitely reduce the material circumstances that lead to it, and help break the cycle of poverty, which in turn vastly reduces violence.

Yet your against socialism which would help greatly

[Telconi]

No, now he kills Nbambe because he doesn't have a cool stereo. The driving force of criminal robbery is desire, not need.

Yes, this is why efforts to reduce poverty never drive down crime. At that point, Mutafa has things to lose that are worth more than a stereo, if he has no food, he has nothing to lose. Desire is not just a one-way street.

They do, but they're far less than a 1 to 1 ratio. As for having "nothing to lose" the statistical affluence of a robber is higher than the statistical affluence of their victim.

[Telconi]

No, but I can definitely reduce the material circumstances that lead to it, and help break the cycle of poverty, which in turn vastly reduces violence.

Yet your against socialism which would help greatly

[Citation needed]

[Kowani]

But the number of overall crimes and the damage done will drop radically.

And this they would be far less devastating.

Knife attacks aren’t less devastating

You try waging a city wide gang war with knives, you’ll find it’s not worth the effort.

No, but I can definitely reduce the material circumstances that lead to it, and help break the cycle of poverty, which in turn vastly reduces violence.

Yet your against socialism which would help greatly

Fundamentally unworkable.

No, but they do make Mutafa not want to kill Nbambe because he doesn’t have any food.

True but then again whilst that does almost complete abolish the desire for robbery-motivated homicide(a statistically significant type in many countries), there will still be the occasional sexually sadistic, domestic dispute based or revenge motivated homicide.

Fun fact. Having a gun in the house increases the risk of homicide in a domestic violence situation.

Yes, this is why efforts to reduce poverty never drive down crime. At that point, Mutafa has things to lose that are worth more than a stereo, if he has no food, he has nothing to lose. Desire is not just a one-way street.

They do, but they're far less than a 1 to 1 ratio.

You are making the perfect the enemy of the good.

As for having "nothing to lose" the statistical affluence of a robber is higher than the statistical affluence of their victim.

Citation needed.

[Soviet Tankistan]

Not my position, but I can see how it would be read that way. Rather, the eradication of the needs for those arms leads to people laying them down.
Tell me again how well that worked out for Chicago.

There is always a need, the hypothetical future is reason enough. You may like the current government, but the next may be worse.

[Soviet Tankistan]

You try waging a city wide gang war with knives, you’ll find it’s not worth the effort.

Try waging a gang war with improvised and stolen weapons that kill just as well, you’ll find its not worth the effort (like all crime should be) but it works well.