579
Just a little friendly compromise, what could go wrong?
(lemmy.world)
Welcome to politcal memes!
These are our rules:
Be civil
Jokes are okay, but don’t intentionally harass or disturb any member of our community. Sexism, racism and bigotry are not allowed. Good faith argumentation only. No posts discouraging people to vote or shaming people for voting.
No misinformation
Don’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.
Posts should be memes
Random pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.
No bots, spam or self-promotion
Follow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.
Yeah but it should be conditional imo. If they're armed or you have suspicion they could be armed, then kill them. Otherwise, maybe aim for the leg or shoulder?
If you're shooting, shoot to kill. There's not a non-lethal place to shoot a human being.
But yeah, jumping straight to the gun might be a bit much for some guy rummaging through your living room drawer. Russia is more like a hardened criminal who's been threatening you every night for the past month busting down your door and beating your kid to death.
Humans very regularly survive gunshots. About twice as many people are injured by gunshots as those who die from them each year in the USA, even when suicides are included. My philosophy is to minimize harm and suffering whenever possible, even at risk to myself.
But yeh Fuck Russia.
Surviving a gunshot does not mean that you were not shot in a place that could have been fatal. You're literally describing Survivorship Bias
You were going to kill them regardless, why tf do you care if the other places you shoot them have a chance of fatality? Minimizing harm is all about reducing chances of undue death or suffering.