I do not need a weapon to resolve or reduce the effects of conflict.?
On average, everyone agrees with consensus between 16 voters.
Please read the comments from other voters below, then scroll down make your decision. Do you agree or disagree with the following statement?
I do not need a weapon to resolve or reduce the effects of conflict.
Reasons To Disagree
Another ambiguous question. It will depend in the type of conflict. If someone is charging me with a long knife, I will shoot him, Not hug him. Needs to be more specific.
27 November 2018
Reasons To Agree
I've been able to have people stand down with mere words, but there are times when words alone won't work. You need a weapon in that case.
27 November 2018
8 February 2020
You shouldn't use a weapon unless needed if you can use words, if not use hands but only if needed use your weapon.
4 May 2020
Reasons for Remain Neutral
METTTC- the situation dictates. The average individual will not encounter a situation where they need a weapon. Some career choices, however, will. And the same is true of some areas of the world where violence is more abundant. The problem is in believing the weapon you have carries with it safety. In reality, a weapon is most effective when You know the attacking is coming. Its a massive gamble to believe a weapon works as a reactionary piece.
Need is a subjective matter when it comes to most things especially conflict because the people in the conflict will dictate the need. If the need for arms is there in the conflict they should be present and the ones who have them should know how, when and when not to use them.
IF AT ALL POSSIBLE I WILL SETTLE ISSUES WITHOUT A WEAPON!!! HOWEVER not every thinks that way.. and if they decide to Elevate an issue to violence then I would defend myself
You can make your comments once you have voted.