369
submitted 1 year ago by farcaster@lemmy.world to c/news@lemmy.world
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] SeedyOne@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago

Clearly the best course is something that failed before and only keeps the criminals armed. Brilliant

[-] ZombieTheZombieCat@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago

How does everyone forget to use the "people will just do it anyway" argument for every other law. When do we legalize all drugs because people just do them anyway

[-] PoliticalAgitator@lemm.ee 2 points 1 year ago

Why stop at drugs? If we're binning laws because people do them anyway, we can legalise rape, murder, DUI, even child slavery.

But maybe don't give them any ideas -- gun sales would sky-rocket and ultimately most pro-gun people are just simps to corporate interests.

[-] TheFonz@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago

I dunno. Seems like most developed nations have figured it out. What's so special about the US?

[-] whofearsthenight@lemm.ee 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Bill Clinton banned assault weapons in 1994; mass shootings dropped by 43%.

George W. Bush and the GOP let the assault weapons ban expire in 2004; mass shootings increased by 245%.

These numbers tell the whole story.

https://elk.zone/mstdn.social/@Strandjunker/111301755969285547

https://www.theonion.com/no-way-to-prevent-this-says-only-nation-where-this-r-1819576527

edit:

more simply: https://www.theonion.com/no-way-to-prevent-this-says-only-nation-where-this-r-1819576527

[-] SupraMario@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

No they didn't, because they weren't really a thing at the time...also columbine and VT happened with handguns during the AWB....it was sunset because it didn't do anything.

[-] whofearsthenight@lemm.ee 3 points 1 year ago

Are you refuting these stats and do you want to provide a source for that?

Also, saying that some gun violence happened so that means gun control doesn't work is nonsense. It's like "well some died in a car crash so seat belts and airbags don't work."

The facts on this one just aren't on your side. Looking at this either way - the US is a third world country when it comes to gun violence, and secondarily, countries with relatively little to no gun control have extreme rates of gun violence.

[-] SeedyOne@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago

That wasn't a prohibition though, I was referring to any number of actual prohibitions. Like alcohol in the 20s and such.

There's no denying taking something built to kill away can reduce said killings and I'm very much for sane, logical gun control. However, the point is that all out prohibition is neither historically or even mathematically feasible considering there are more of them than actual Americans (another problem we have). Do you understand the nuance?

[-] PoliticalAgitator@lemm.ee 3 points 1 year ago

How are the gun violence stats looking after 25 years of the pro-gun community insisting they have the solutions?

Should we plot them on a chart next to the profitability of the gun manufacturers?

Maybe your next solution could focus on tracking down that magic gun fairy that keeps giving guns to criminals, since they're definitely not being supplied and enabled by responsible gun owners like yourself.

[-] SeedyOne@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

You completely misunderstood my point and can see my other response for clarity. While I'm on your side in general and think we need far more control, you are doing the movement a disservice by trying the "how are the numbers?" argument when it's such a poor choice.

When you go look up your stats to prove me wrong, remember how the classifications work and that data can be spun. That way when you see gun violence overall is actually down and how single person handgun suicides and gang violence data is used to juice the numbers (both directions), you might understand there's far better arguments for gun control. Be an ally, not a hindrance.

[-] PoliticalAgitator@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago

That way when you see gun violence overall is actually down and how single person handgun suicides and gang violence data is used to juice the numbers (both directions), you might understand there's far better arguments for gun control.

Nope, don't push this trash. Every single gun death was a preventable death and not a single one should be swept under the rug.

Means reduction and survivability play a massive role in the suicide prevention.

Widespread legal firearms allow distressed people to end their lives in a split second impulse, robbing them of an opportunity to be helped.

Only 1 in 10 people who attempt suicide will go on to die by suicide, but the survival rate for attempts with guns is practically zero.

Teenagers are blowing their brains out with their guns of their "responsible gun owner" fathers who no doubt bragged about how he was going to "keep his family safe", then failed to secure it from a deeply distressed child.

You can also fuck off with the "gang violence" stuff, which is frequently code for "don't worry, they're only black people".

There is no magic gun fairy arming them. They either bought the gun at a store because the system is deeply flawed or they stole it from a "responsible gun owner" that failed to secure it.

But even writing it all off as "just criminals doing crime", it's still bullshit. Innocent people are killed, maimed and traumatised by both armed criminals and the trigger happy police who use them as an excuse.

And just how much gun violence are they responsible for? Roughly the same as domestic abusers who kill their partners. Want to hand wave them away too?

Those figures are include in the gun violence stats because they're a symptom of the gun problem.

If you want to be an "ally", the first step is to stop pushing the talking points of racists and lobby groups.

[-] SeedyOne@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Not a single source or actual number posted after all that bluster. You tell me not to push trash and you keep pulling irrelevant numbers out of your ass. And that racism line? Holy shit, what a coward you are cherry picking and trying to paint me as a dog whistle user. I wish you could see how off the mark you are but that'll never happen.

Congratulations on being the first absolute dumbfuck of my Lemmy experience (I should have known by the username). It's a shame, because you mean well but why would I bother to engage further? Fuck off.

[-] PoliticalAgitator@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago

Not a single source or actual number posted after all that bluster

Your comments aren't exactly riddled with carefully sourced statistics -- you even tried to pre-empt people finding you factually wrong with claims of figures being manipulated.

But fortunately you don't seem to hold yourself to the same standard you hold others.

And that racism line? Holy shit, what a coward you are cherry picking and trying to paint me as a dog whistle user.

If you don't want your hot take sounding racist, don't repeat the talking points of racists verbatim. It's literally lifted from Bill O'Reilly.

I wish you could see how off the mark you are but that'll never happen.

No thanks, I have no interest in whatever context the rest of your life may offer. You wrote a comment that reads exactly like a sock puppet, fully aware that the people on this site know nothing about you beyond your username.

but why would I bother to engage further?

Probably so you could regurgitate more apologism about which people killed with guns are allowed in the "people killed with guns" statistics.

this post was submitted on 26 Oct 2023
369 points (100.0% liked)

News

23353 readers
2674 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS