• tomiant@piefed.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 hours ago

      What attacker? There is no attacker, it’s all a hypothetical situation meant to rile up people like you.

    • wonderingwanderer@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      4 hours ago

      By that logic, shouldn’t everyone carry a gun too? If it’s theoretically only going to be used against an active attacker, what’s the big deal?

      (Note: this isn’t an argument for carrying guns)

      • NotASharkInAManSuit@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 hours ago

        A lot of people carry guns specifically for that reason. I’m not saying it’s a perfect solution, but it speaks of a bigger issue that is being ignored. If people are forced to look out for themselves then the options become very limited and outside of the possibility of anything approaching ideal. I’m not choosing to worry about the attackers getting set on fire in this situation, my concerns and those of the people who have a need for things like this have already been outright ignored entirely. People don’t have a better option, it was taken from them already.

        • wonderingwanderer@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          3 hours ago

          And has easy access to guns never caused problems? Possibly more problems than they’ve solved?

          My problem isn’t with people deterring potential attackers or fighting off actual attackers. My concern is with the potential for misuse, and the fact that labeling this as some innocent means of self-defense is covering up the fact that it wouldn’t be limited to being used exclusively by victims. That’s just marketing. Any psycho could buy one of these.

          • NotASharkInAManSuit@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            3 hours ago

            Yup. That’s the available option.

            Maybe we should try to address the issues with the longstanding preservation of rape culture. When that never happens, though, this is what we are left with. You’re mad at the pen, you should be mad at the person who threw the pen.

            • tomiant@piefed.social
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              2 hours ago

              You are mad at men, just like racists are mad at immigrants. There is literally no difference in your worldviews, only the targets.