Sorry, u/Unbannable-Redditor – your submission has been removed for breaking Rule B:
> You must personally hold the view and **demonstrate that you are open to it changing**. A post cannot be on behalf of others, playing devil's advocate, as any entity other than yourself, or 'soapboxing'. [See the wiki page for more information](http://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_b).
If you would like to appeal, [**you must first read the list of soapboxing indicators and common mistakes in appeal**](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_indicators_of_rule_b_violations), review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%20B%20Appeal%20Unbannable-Redditor&message=Unbannable-Redditor%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20\[their%20post\]\(https://old.reddit.com/r/changemyview/comments/1dlyvfs/-/\)%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted.
Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our [moderation standards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards).
Gays, women and short straight men aren’t automatically weak
Your sister is a bad cop if she points a loaded gun in someone’s face over ANY argument.
Your friend is a psychopath and belongs in prison, like your sister
You know that people tend to be tougher on women than men, don't you? Easy to swear and put your finger in the face of a defenseless woman. Hard to do that with a six-foot-tall pumped-up guy with a mean face.
>Easy to swear and put your finger in the face of a defenseless woman.
Neither of those are good reason to draw a loaded firearm.
She sounds like a terrible cop if she's actually pointing a loaded gun at people for such mundane reasons as cursing or putting a finger in her face.
Sorry, u/DrFishTaco – your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 3:
> **Refrain from accusing OP or anyone else of being unwilling to change their view, or of arguing in bad faith**. Ask clarifying questions instead (see: socratic method). If you think they are still exhibiting poor behaviour, please message us. [See the wiki page for more information](http://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_3).
If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%203%20Appeal%20DrFishTaco&message=DrFishTaco%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20\[their%20comment\]\(https://old.reddit.com/r/changemyview/comments/1dlyvfs/-/l9smviz/\)%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted.
Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our [moderation standards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards).
Both. It can be both. Or neither.
A man finds out his wife is cheating, pulls out a gun and murders her. No equalizer there, he was already stronger. You can argue cowardice of not wanting to do it with his hands but I wouldn't call that cowardice so much as convenience.
A man is attacked, hit over the back of the head with a bat. Disoriented and panicking he pulls his gun and shoots his assailant to death. Yes on the equalizer, no on the cowardice.
A man pulls picks a fight and loses. He then goes home and gets a gun to shoot the winner. Yes on the equalizer, yes on the cowardly since he can neither win on his own nor stomach the thought of losing.
Weapons can be an equalizer, or cowardly, or both, or neither. Your friend and sister I won't comment on except to say that they may be walking headfirst into jail eventually if they pull weapons to kill where it isn't needed. Self defense has limits.
Sister should be fine. If a cop shoots someone that person is just assumed to be a bad guy. The short manqho stabs people for hitting on his girl should already be in prison.
This view justifies using weapons to bully or dominate others, and this misunderstands equalizers by escalating situations with weapons instead of de-escalating them before it ever gets to that point.
Furthermore, assuming people like women, short men, or gay people are inherently weak and need weapons to compensate is a dangerous stereotype.
True self-defense involves using proportionate force and weapons as a last resort, not a first response to control or threaten someone.
Your sister needs to be reevaluated for her job. If she's doing what you're claiming she's doing, and you're not in fact trolling us, because that is psychopathic behavior.
To change your view I will say that it depends on the context.
Whether a weapon is an equalizer or cowardice depends on who the aggressor in the situation is.
- Using a weapon or equalizer to provoke conflict or initiate an altercation is cowardice.
- Using a weapon or equalizer to defend from an unwanted altercation is not.
Are weapons always equalizers, or is it more situational?
In *The Princess Bride* there is scene where the *Dread Pirate Roberts* meets *Fezzik* (portrayed by Andre the Giant).
*Fezzik* is way bigger and stronger, but *Roberts* has a sword. Is the sword an equalizer here? I'd argue that fighting hand-to-hand is more equal. The sword is a clear advantage.
*Fezzik* also agrees. Which is why he picks up a rock and threatens to crush *Roberts* with it. Is the rock an equalizer? Not really. It's effectively a ranged weapon that gives *Fezzik* a huge advantage.
Both parties finally agree to a fist fight. Don't you agree this is the most equal and brave option out of the others?
>but imo any guy who is straight but short/weak, gays or women should use weapons.
I at least understand what you're getting at when you're talking about weak men and women. But why list gay people? Are gay people inherently weaker than straight people? What're you basing that on?
>My sister is short and joined the police and carries a gun around, any argument she pulls out her gun and points it at someone's face.
That's a huge escalation, and not one that necessarily makes her safer. Cops should try to deescalate situations to avoid violence, pulling a gun on someone during "any argument" is wildly irresponsible and if she feels that threatened she shouldn't be a police officer.
>he was stabbed in the gut and his cavity defiled.
Who are all these insane people you're hanging out with? Someone "harassing" you on the street is not an argument for stabbing them oh my god. Is this post a joke?
Do you believe weapons are equalizers in theory, or in practice?
46 percent of American men personally owned a firearm, compared to 21 percent of women.
[https://www.statista.com/statistics/623453/gun-ownership-in-the-us-by-gender/](https://www.statista.com/statistics/623453/gun-ownership-in-the-us-by-gender/)
Is that an indication that firearms is an equalizer?
There was very interesting discourse i read about a dude not getting why pistol duels used to be prefferable over sword duels and such. The guy replying said that duels were about show of courage and not skill, if someone was good with the sword and sword duels were norm he could go out and bully everyone but with pistol duels being the norm he wouldnt because there would be a decent chance he eats a shot to the face even challanging an inexperienced opponent
It draws parallels to your view but critical difference is that in pistol duels both guys got pistols and both of them would raise them at the SAME time. In situations you are describing the dude who pulls the gun FIRST wins and gets to bully.
That is why its not an equalizer. You have the gun the other dude has a gun and you are in an argument but he pulls it out first. You are not in equal position just because you have the gun.
In your examples your cousin pulls out the gun and bullies someone in any argument. Equality would be for the other guy to pull the gun on her (very real possibility if she really pulls it out on every argument, idk how can you consider that normal and not psych ward behavior). In the mugging example if the other guy approached you with the gun tough luck you are again not equal.
There are two types of cowardice. The first is someone who avoids a fight others think they shouldn't avoid. The second is when you want someone else to avoid fighting you a certain way, so you call that way of fighting cowardice to cash in on the social stigma of the first type.
Weapons are equalizers when both sides have them and training. When boths sides have unequal phyiscal characteristics then its clearly not in the bigger/stronger person's interests for that to be equalised in any way, so they're going to call anything which reduces their chances of winning 'cowardice', in an effort to win.
This view falls flat on its face when you realize that anyone can have a weapon. Is any melee weapon and equalizer of strength when both parties have one? I’m a taller and very skinny man, if you give me and a starting NFL lineman swords not much has been equalized.
Also what weapon you have very much matters. If someone has a .25 acp loaded with subsonic ammunition then they’re not really equalizing anything. Yes a .25 acp is still a firearm but this is a caliber that’s been known to hit a skull and ride along the skull giving someone a nasty headache and nothing more, it’s also been known to be stopped by a heavy jacket. It’s strictly a get off me caliber, and by that I mean it’s most effective at muzzle pressed into their stomach or nostril range because the hot gases and muzzle flare are going to do just as much damage if not more than the actual bullet.
It is cowardice especially if you are starting the fight. If you bring a weapon to a fight you start, you are basically telling the other person that you would lose without the weapon. Also your sister should not have guns or anything dangerous if she does she like that.
A shot gun beats an aimed gun. An aimed gun beats a held gun. A held gun beats a holstered gun. a holstered gun beats a stored gun. Guns give the advantage to the person most willing to escalate violence.
What I don't like about your view is that it gives weak little assholes carte blanche to be douchebags. You can't shoot them, because they don't represent the physical threat that a tall, fit guy does. Equal opportunity mayhem, I say.
If you would be to cowardly to engage without equalizing via weapon isn't the role the weapon fills _addressing cowardice_?
Being not a coward doesn't mean "not afraid when the odds are equal or better", to most it means "not afraid even when the odds are against you".
It is often dumb to not be a coward or to not equalize, but it's definitely because of that sensible cowardice that one wants to equalize.
Sorry, u/Unbannable-Redditor – your submission has been removed for breaking Rule B: > You must personally hold the view and **demonstrate that you are open to it changing**. A post cannot be on behalf of others, playing devil's advocate, as any entity other than yourself, or 'soapboxing'. [See the wiki page for more information](http://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_b). If you would like to appeal, [**you must first read the list of soapboxing indicators and common mistakes in appeal**](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_indicators_of_rule_b_violations), review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%20B%20Appeal%20Unbannable-Redditor&message=Unbannable-Redditor%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20\[their%20post\]\(https://old.reddit.com/r/changemyview/comments/1dlyvfs/-/\)%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted. Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our [moderation standards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards).
Gays, women and short straight men aren’t automatically weak Your sister is a bad cop if she points a loaded gun in someone’s face over ANY argument. Your friend is a psychopath and belongs in prison, like your sister
You know that people tend to be tougher on women than men, don't you? Easy to swear and put your finger in the face of a defenseless woman. Hard to do that with a six-foot-tall pumped-up guy with a mean face.
>Easy to swear and put your finger in the face of a defenseless woman. Neither of those are good reason to draw a loaded firearm. She sounds like a terrible cop if she's actually pointing a loaded gun at people for such mundane reasons as cursing or putting a finger in her face.
[удалено]
Sorry, u/DrFishTaco – your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 3: > **Refrain from accusing OP or anyone else of being unwilling to change their view, or of arguing in bad faith**. Ask clarifying questions instead (see: socratic method). If you think they are still exhibiting poor behaviour, please message us. [See the wiki page for more information](http://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_3). If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%203%20Appeal%20DrFishTaco&message=DrFishTaco%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20\[their%20comment\]\(https://old.reddit.com/r/changemyview/comments/1dlyvfs/-/l9smviz/\)%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted. Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our [moderation standards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards).
Where are you from? It isnt the usa, but I'm curious.
Both. It can be both. Or neither. A man finds out his wife is cheating, pulls out a gun and murders her. No equalizer there, he was already stronger. You can argue cowardice of not wanting to do it with his hands but I wouldn't call that cowardice so much as convenience. A man is attacked, hit over the back of the head with a bat. Disoriented and panicking he pulls his gun and shoots his assailant to death. Yes on the equalizer, no on the cowardice. A man pulls picks a fight and loses. He then goes home and gets a gun to shoot the winner. Yes on the equalizer, yes on the cowardly since he can neither win on his own nor stomach the thought of losing. Weapons can be an equalizer, or cowardly, or both, or neither. Your friend and sister I won't comment on except to say that they may be walking headfirst into jail eventually if they pull weapons to kill where it isn't needed. Self defense has limits.
Sister should be fine. If a cop shoots someone that person is just assumed to be a bad guy. The short manqho stabs people for hitting on his girl should already be in prison.
This view justifies using weapons to bully or dominate others, and this misunderstands equalizers by escalating situations with weapons instead of de-escalating them before it ever gets to that point. Furthermore, assuming people like women, short men, or gay people are inherently weak and need weapons to compensate is a dangerous stereotype. True self-defense involves using proportionate force and weapons as a last resort, not a first response to control or threaten someone. Your sister needs to be reevaluated for her job. If she's doing what you're claiming she's doing, and you're not in fact trolling us, because that is psychopathic behavior.
To change your view I will say that it depends on the context. Whether a weapon is an equalizer or cowardice depends on who the aggressor in the situation is. - Using a weapon or equalizer to provoke conflict or initiate an altercation is cowardice. - Using a weapon or equalizer to defend from an unwanted altercation is not.
Are weapons always equalizers, or is it more situational? In *The Princess Bride* there is scene where the *Dread Pirate Roberts* meets *Fezzik* (portrayed by Andre the Giant). *Fezzik* is way bigger and stronger, but *Roberts* has a sword. Is the sword an equalizer here? I'd argue that fighting hand-to-hand is more equal. The sword is a clear advantage. *Fezzik* also agrees. Which is why he picks up a rock and threatens to crush *Roberts* with it. Is the rock an equalizer? Not really. It's effectively a ranged weapon that gives *Fezzik* a huge advantage. Both parties finally agree to a fist fight. Don't you agree this is the most equal and brave option out of the others?
>but imo any guy who is straight but short/weak, gays or women should use weapons. I at least understand what you're getting at when you're talking about weak men and women. But why list gay people? Are gay people inherently weaker than straight people? What're you basing that on? >My sister is short and joined the police and carries a gun around, any argument she pulls out her gun and points it at someone's face. That's a huge escalation, and not one that necessarily makes her safer. Cops should try to deescalate situations to avoid violence, pulling a gun on someone during "any argument" is wildly irresponsible and if she feels that threatened she shouldn't be a police officer. >he was stabbed in the gut and his cavity defiled. Who are all these insane people you're hanging out with? Someone "harassing" you on the street is not an argument for stabbing them oh my god. Is this post a joke?
Do you believe weapons are equalizers in theory, or in practice? 46 percent of American men personally owned a firearm, compared to 21 percent of women. [https://www.statista.com/statistics/623453/gun-ownership-in-the-us-by-gender/](https://www.statista.com/statistics/623453/gun-ownership-in-the-us-by-gender/) Is that an indication that firearms is an equalizer?
There was very interesting discourse i read about a dude not getting why pistol duels used to be prefferable over sword duels and such. The guy replying said that duels were about show of courage and not skill, if someone was good with the sword and sword duels were norm he could go out and bully everyone but with pistol duels being the norm he wouldnt because there would be a decent chance he eats a shot to the face even challanging an inexperienced opponent It draws parallels to your view but critical difference is that in pistol duels both guys got pistols and both of them would raise them at the SAME time. In situations you are describing the dude who pulls the gun FIRST wins and gets to bully. That is why its not an equalizer. You have the gun the other dude has a gun and you are in an argument but he pulls it out first. You are not in equal position just because you have the gun. In your examples your cousin pulls out the gun and bullies someone in any argument. Equality would be for the other guy to pull the gun on her (very real possibility if she really pulls it out on every argument, idk how can you consider that normal and not psych ward behavior). In the mugging example if the other guy approached you with the gun tough luck you are again not equal.
There are two types of cowardice. The first is someone who avoids a fight others think they shouldn't avoid. The second is when you want someone else to avoid fighting you a certain way, so you call that way of fighting cowardice to cash in on the social stigma of the first type. Weapons are equalizers when both sides have them and training. When boths sides have unequal phyiscal characteristics then its clearly not in the bigger/stronger person's interests for that to be equalised in any way, so they're going to call anything which reduces their chances of winning 'cowardice', in an effort to win.
This view falls flat on its face when you realize that anyone can have a weapon. Is any melee weapon and equalizer of strength when both parties have one? I’m a taller and very skinny man, if you give me and a starting NFL lineman swords not much has been equalized. Also what weapon you have very much matters. If someone has a .25 acp loaded with subsonic ammunition then they’re not really equalizing anything. Yes a .25 acp is still a firearm but this is a caliber that’s been known to hit a skull and ride along the skull giving someone a nasty headache and nothing more, it’s also been known to be stopped by a heavy jacket. It’s strictly a get off me caliber, and by that I mean it’s most effective at muzzle pressed into their stomach or nostril range because the hot gases and muzzle flare are going to do just as much damage if not more than the actual bullet.
It is cowardice especially if you are starting the fight. If you bring a weapon to a fight you start, you are basically telling the other person that you would lose without the weapon. Also your sister should not have guns or anything dangerous if she does she like that.
A shot gun beats an aimed gun. An aimed gun beats a held gun. A held gun beats a holstered gun. a holstered gun beats a stored gun. Guns give the advantage to the person most willing to escalate violence.
What I don't like about your view is that it gives weak little assholes carte blanche to be douchebags. You can't shoot them, because they don't represent the physical threat that a tall, fit guy does. Equal opportunity mayhem, I say.
If you would be to cowardly to engage without equalizing via weapon isn't the role the weapon fills _addressing cowardice_? Being not a coward doesn't mean "not afraid when the odds are equal or better", to most it means "not afraid even when the odds are against you". It is often dumb to not be a coward or to not equalize, but it's definitely because of that sensible cowardice that one wants to equalize.
not wanting to engage in an unfavorable fight, and instead looking for ways to "equalise" (or rather have a huge advantage) IS cowardice.