492
submitted 1 year ago by GiddyGap@lemm.ee to c/news@lemmy.world
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] SupraMario@lemmy.world 14 points 1 year ago

450+ million guns, you're not stopping gang violence like this which is the mass majority of all of our gun crime, by banning guns from lawful citizens. Dudes like this are already barred. Why don't you ask, why out system let him out.

[-] RedditWanderer@lemmy.world 46 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Says man from only country where this happens regularly.

Plenty of other countries haven't banned guns from lawful citizens and dont have this problem.

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

Ok, man from perfect country. How would you personally solve this problem of gun violence? Would you form a posse and roundup all of the crazed lunatics out there who would dare to try and protect their families with a firearm? Would you raid the houses of anyone who may or may not have owned a gun in the past and search under the floorboards?

Seriously I want to know. How would you help all of these mentally ill people who seem to think that guns are toys, or just deeply want to harm other people?

[-] RedditWanderer@lemmy.world 33 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

You don't need me to tell you that. You wouldn't believe me anyway. There are plenty of professionals who have studied and acquired factual data of how other "perfect countries" do it and the differences. From the differences the solutions become very clear.

It's about restricting access, not banning. There's no one size fits all solution because nothing is perfect so you pick your poison. Find a country where this doesn't happen every day (so any developed country), look a the way they do things and pick the one you prefer to support - they all have upsides and downsides. What you have isn't working though.

[-] SupraMario@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

Every country that has basically an effective ban, also has safety nets for the people, doesn't have a gang problem like we do, and focuses on education and not locking everyone up. They also never had 450+ million firearms in civilian hands. So please share with the class how you think you could pull it off without having all those safety nets in place.

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 10 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

How about having all those safety nets in place and regulated guns? Just an idea...

load more comments (16 replies)
[-] SkepticalButOpenMinded@lemmy.ca 6 points 1 year ago

That’s an exaggeration. The US has a better safety net than a lot of countries with much less gun death and violence. Education could better for a rich country, but is not bad. I am all for locking fewer people up, but that’s not the reason there’s gun violence.

This is always the argument against improving anything in the US. “We’re too special!” It’s just not true. Background checks, wait times, permit requirements, concealed carry restrictions, domestic violence restrictions, etc. These have all been empirically shown to reduce gun deaths in the US.

[-] Bytemeister@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Maybe put those safety nets in place? Offer buy-backs on firearms, or a grace period to turn in unregistered firearms with no questions? Crack down on fraudulent "theft" and loss reports? Modernize the firearms database? Create incentives for law enforcement to execute red-flag laws? Require a higher level of training and responsibility to own a firearm?

Literally doing the bare minimum and just effectively enforcing the laws on the books would make a huge improvement, but we can't even do that because republicans like to whip up the base with the idea that their right to own an AR-15 is going to stop the liburl gubment from takin awah mah rites!

[-] Ibaudia@lemmy.world 40 points 1 year ago

This has been proven to be untrue by other countries who have done the same in the past.

[-] SupraMario@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

No it hasn't, no one in the history of the world has had this many firearms in civilian hands. Even when Australia took the firearms, only 60% turned in their 1mil total firearms in civ hands.

[-] Ibaudia@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago

And gun deaths have dropped enormously ever since.

[-] SupraMario@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

Australia never had a firearm problem to begin with. This is pants on head stupid take. If you have 100 deaths from firearms a year and removing access to the already small amount in civ hands and gun deaths drop to 50.... everyone now says firearms removed from people dropped by 50% when it was already so low it was a rounding error to begin with.

[-] LemmysMum@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

No, we just had the largest massacre of private citizens by a single shooter in recorded history, (still hasn't been beaten despite how often Americans try, they must really hate us being better than them at something involving guns), and numerous others before it, and none after it. But tell me again how you know nothing about Australia, it's history, or gun control.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] Quetzlcoatl@sh.itjust.works 22 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)
[-] dudinax@programming.dev 20 points 1 year ago

That's stupid. If it were illegal to carry guns around, far fewer crooks would carry guns. They'd be harder to get and they'd have to balance the risk of being caught with a gun.

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

Lol what??? It's already illegal for criminals to carry. That's why they do it, they're criminals. We now have more states with CC than ever before, and we actually have lower crime now than we did back in the 70/80s when CC wasn't allowed.

[-] Heresy_generator@kbin.social 18 points 1 year ago

How about we just get rid of "private sale" exceptions to background checks in states like Tennessee to slow the tide of guns flowing into the black market?

[-] 8bitguy@kbin.social 28 points 1 year ago

In Tennessee, one has to buy liquor from the government, but can buy a gun (including semi-auto rifles) from a random person in a parking lot. No questions asked.

[-] ElleChaise@kbin.social 17 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I know a person who actually obtained a handgun this way. In a parking lot of a bar on Florida, from a seller who was in his lunch break as an electrician... I'll let those details sink in for anyone safety oriented.

[-] SupraMario@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

O noooo, a bar parking lot...the humanity....did this someone you know go on to become a serial killer? Or do you still know them and they're a normal person.

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

Most firearms are semi-auto.... what's your point? You clearly don't know much about firearms with a statement like that.

You can do this in pretty much every state as well. Private sales are legal basically in the entire USA.

[-] Bonehead@kbin.social 18 points 1 year ago

You can also ask why there are so many guns freely floating around that someone like this was capable of obtaining one despite being barred.

[-] lightnsfw@reddthat.com 1 points 1 year ago

Maybe if someone is so dangerous that they are barred from owning a gun they belong in a cage...

[-] Grimy@lemmy.world 14 points 1 year ago

I'm so tired of this brain dead take. The amount of guns on the street and gang violence is directly related to how easy it is to aquire them.

[-] AbouBenAdhem@lemmy.world 13 points 1 year ago

gang violence like this which is the mass majority of all of our gun crime

Source?

The most recent stats I could find for gang-related deaths (gun or not) was 2012, when there were 2,363 reported out of a national total of 12,765 homicides.

[-] SheeEttin@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago
[-] AbouBenAdhem@lemmy.world 16 points 1 year ago

The 2,363 figure also includes non-firearm murders—I was looking for directly-comparable stats.

But in any case, it isn’t anywhere near a “mass majority”.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] TokenBoomer@lemmy.world 9 points 1 year ago

Marx has the answer. Change material conditions, so there is less crime, thus less need for prisons. But no one wants to read.

[-] SupraMario@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

You mean no one wants a tankie shithole for a country...

[-] TokenBoomer@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Yes, no one wants to read. This “accident” didn’t happen in a Marxist-Leninist country.

You don’t know what you are talking about. It’s not a good look

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

No I absolutely do know what I'm talking about, but the lot of you all don't have a clue. You sit in your white privilege ivory towers and think only the police should have a monopoly on force...and at the same time wanting to defund them as well. You make no sense.

this post was submitted on 10 Nov 2023
492 points (100.0% liked)

News

23320 readers
2816 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