My addiction to violence. Nice assumption there, buddy.
And also a very nice way to leave a conversation by trying to claim what I say is false. My simple sentence is unfortunately very true.
Your poetic rant about Ghandi, doves, being special, and pizza also makes you seem intelligent, but until you explain what your super secret is, you’re just ranting lunatic who believes in fairy tale endings.
And don’t think for one second that you’re the only person that has ever “given thought to peace.” All of us have. However, many of us are grounded in reality. I would also never give up my humanity and freedom for some false, forced, oppressive peace. A conflict that ends in freedoms and rights taken a way is not a resolution.
In a peaceful world where murder is impossible, firearms would still serve as a nice form of recreation.
If you insist on the right to own a gun, you insist for a tool of death for a living world in which that is antithetical. You are addicted to violence in that you cannot fathom a world without it.
Your sentence is true for an argument I was never having. Maybe. I shouldn’t deem it true because I’m not gonna undertake the logic puzzle of arguing it, especially with someone who saw what I wrote and said to themselves “but wait guns make us equal” rather than something disagreeable but appropriate like “but violence is an inherent quality to humanity.” Sorry to leave you hanging on that one.
The whole point of creating the litmus test is that it serves as a way to distinguish the people who are capable of talking about this shit, and if you see the peace Gandhi believed in & what I’m attempting to convey as “false, forced, oppressive,” or you think I am trying to strip you of rights rather than convince you that you only think you need them because of your own deep-set fear of humanity, you didn’t pass. You do not understand the principle of non-violent resistance and that it demands free decision, sometimes the only decision possible, by its agents.
And, you, too, are not reading what I’m writing: I didn’t say I was the only person who thought about peace, I even said I’m not special. I did distinguish myself from the “hawks and doves,” a classic phrase meant to conjure up distinct sides in a battle that I’m not participating in and you don’t have to either. You referring to it my mention of doves as poetic suggests that you’re unaware of that meaning, which doesn’t look fondly upon the potential of our discussion.
Possibly the fifth time I’ve written this, even in advance of people saying it because I expected the argument as I, too, have found pleasure in firing an AK at some beer cans: in a peaceful world where murder is possible but we choose not to employ it, guns cannot serve a recreational purpose as their original purpose ceases to be. They become an outdated symbol of a history we’ve abandoned. People still practice swordplay and archery because of that same addiction to violence— we don’t even use them for their intended purpose, we just love playing at it, pretending that the skills we foster can be used for anything but killing when other talents like tennis or juggling exist.
Watch that link at the end of my last post, it’s all you need to know in about ninety seconds. Everything we do is a choice between fear and love and you have the freedom to decide which side you stake your claim in every moment of every day.
And look at me go, I can’t tell if I’m continuing this conversation because I’m afraid of looking like a lunatic or if I love you as a human being too much to let it drop. perhaps the true fucker has been inside me all along