Instead of arming civilians for vigilantism pressure should be put on the government to deal with the root causes of criminal behaviour.

As far as I was aware the legal punishment for theft wasn’t the death penalty, but here you are saying a citizen dealing out that punishment without a judge or jury isn’t only acceptable but should be actively encouraged.

If citizens have a “Constitutional Right” to have a gun, why does exercising the right so often result in law enforcement killing them without a trial?

I have sympathy for someone who’s actually been a victim of violent crime, and it’s a shame therapy isn’t a more viable option. However, there’s a big difference between
“I was a victim of violent crime and feel more comfortable having a means of protection on me” and
“This might lead to robberies.”
“That’s what guns are for.”

I have no problems with people carrying mace for self defense. There are highly effective less lethal options.

“murder and rape are a fact of life.”

I’d just like to take a moment to remind you of how this conversation started:

https://lemmy.ca/comment/11978138

Oh no, I meant the consequences for other people when he misuses his gun are much more severe than the consequences for other people if someone steals from them.

The dystopian attitude is “you better be ready to severely harm someone at a moment’s notice every day, otherwise you’re just unprepared for day to day life.”

So vigilantism then.

So completely irrelevant to the topic that “Needing to have a gun on you just to be prepared for your day is fucked up.”

But consider the consequences if I misuse my gun. They’re quite a lot more serious than those caught stealing.

I agree with you completely.

Was my statement wrong in any way?

Do you know how analogies work? Of course the two things I compared are different.

That doesn’t answer my question as to if my statement was incorrect.

You’ve made an analogy about preparedness and let the assumption hang that that makes both things equal.

Just like saying “a fish swimming is like a bird flying” isn’t an argument that a bird would be able to fly underwater, saying “I’ve never been in an accident and still wear a seatbelt” is not an argument for “always have a deadly weapon on you when you leave the house” not being evidence of a completely fucked up situation.

The people with guns are different people and not me. Why should I trust them?

There’s also laws governing what constitutes theft. Your entire argument about needing a gun is dependent on people not following the law.

Was my statement wrong in any way?

If it’s getting old stop trying to argue against it by saying the dystopian attitude is necessary.

“Wearing a seatbelt is the same as walking around with a device that can near instantly kill people.” Is something said by someone living in a dystopia.

Try “A government should take care of its citizens.”

“Property is more valuable than human lives.”
A statement from a person in a developed country apparently…

Did you not have a gun at the time? Or did your ownership of a gun not prevent the theft?

There’s a difference between “violent crime exists” and “violent crime is so prevalent that regular citizens need to carry around an implement designed to kill people quickly while they go about their daily lives.”