• Eidolon_Alpha@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    The only ‘mass shooting’ was the Philly one. Intellectually stunted and politically blinded morons are trying to change the definition by lumping in gang bangers doing drive bys and shooting up house parties. If you Individually dig through the gunviolencearchive.org sources, the overwhelming majority of them have an African American teenager with a handgun set out to settle a personal vendetta; yet somehow that scenario is - by gunviolence.orgs own statistical criteria - categorized the same exact way as a deranged psychopath with an AR-15 randomly shooting up a mall (which even once is way too fucking common, but not as statistically prominent as the site is trying to mislead the public to believe).

    It’s not a gun problem, it’s a cultural one.

    • Lininop@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Why can’t it be both? Especially when guns are so interwoven into the culture.

      So it’s not a mass shooting if the person is black and the crime is personal? What led you to come with that criteria? I tend to think “A mass shooting is a violent crime in which an attacker kills or injures multiple individuals simultaneously using a firearm.” is a pretty fair definition. You know “mass” as in several individuals involved and “shooting” as in a firearm was involved. Keep it up with the mental gymnastics though.

      • thoughtorgan@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        People love to point the fingers at the tool used to do evil things. Instead of addressing why the evil thing is happening.

        Banning and restricting guns is a band aid solution that harms the general populace more than it benefits.

        Bad actors that want to inflict harm are not concerned with using something legal to get the job done. There will always be inventive whackos out there that will find ways to hurt people. Guns or no guns.

        The Swiss have almost the same firearm to people ratio as America ( at least compared to the rest of the world ) and under have far fewer of the same issues. I think this is largely because of cultural differences and availability for healthcare.

        • absquatulate@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          People keep giving the swiss as an example but it’s not the same context. Mainly because in Switzerland all men go through mandatory military service and that builds some discipline when handling a gun. Also they still have to get ( strict ) permits for those weapons, even with the accompanying training.

          It is my impression ( and I apologize for the generalizations ) that in the US they’re essentially handing out assault rifles to any rando with some cash on him.

          • thoughtorgan@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            A swiss permit is as strict as a USA background check.

            I’m not even kidding.

            You get a permit by not having a relevant criminal record and being of age.

            USA background check is to see if you have a relevant criminal record and if you are old enough.

            Saaaaaame shit in the end.

            USA gun laws vary by state. Even those with the strictest of gun laws still have lots of gun violence.

            Disarming your population isn’t the answer.

        • Redrum714@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          Weird how the US is literally the only first world country with this problem. No way it has anything to do with the ease of access to guns!

          • PowerCrazy@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            5
            ·
            1 year ago

            I wonder if there are any other differences in America from other first-world countries? Maybe it’s the availability of swimming pools? Or too many McDonalds? Or maybe there are numerous social issues that are unaddressed here in the states and have been responsible for a much higher incidence of violence in general, of which guns are a small part.

            • Redrum714@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              There’s violent and unhinged people in every country. The difference is the guns… it couldn’t be anymore fucking obvious lol

              • thoughtorgan@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                People who want to kill people will kill people regardless of the tools available to them.

                Hardware stores in any county contain the means to create mass killing events with a weekly paycheck.

                You are not safe from people who intend to do you harm because you have gun laws. Stop thinking life is so simple.

                • Redrum714@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Weird how there’s no pandemic of mass murders with hardware tools. Stop being fucking delusional and use your brain.

  • Pergle@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    It seems like common sense to make guns have the same requirements as cars. You need to pass a short course and get a license. I don’t understand what is unclear about the 2nd amendment: “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”

    Right there, in the text: “Well regulated”.

    • galloog1@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Well regulated, as in well maintained. Additionally, it is a conditional clause providing the context for its existence. Taking this legal approach has never worked in court. The Constitution was written to be changed for a reason but we are afraid to or it is opposed.

  • MrMonkey@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Every time I ask this question:

    What lae do you propose, that didn’t already exist, wouldn’t violate the Bill of Rights, and wouldn’t cause a civil war?

    Most of the time I either get answers that include laws that exist that the government doesn’t enforce, or a “fuck the constitution, let’s have a civil war!”

    For example the army is supposed to report people discharged distribution to the NCIS. They don’t.

    The ATF is supposed to follow up when a banned individual tries to buy a gun. They don’t.

    The ATF is supposed to check on people when gun dealers report them for attempted straw purchases. They don’t.

    Know someone who had illegal weapons? Call the police and see what they do. Here’s a hint: nothing

    So, does anyone have one?

    • BartsBigBugBag@lemmy.tf
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Most crime, including mass shootings, are an outgrowth of material conditions in a given society. You can’t resolve those material conditions with reactive policies like you’ve outlined below, you have to act proactively. You want less white disaffected individuals shooting people, then work to bring those people into the fold. Ban right wing media that pushes entirely false narratives. Give everyone an irreducible minimum that gives them space to exist without constant coercion from society to self-enslave. Drop 70+% off the military budget and put ALL of it into social programs. Welfare, public housing, community centers, public works programs, etc. There’s infinite ways to resolve this, not a single one of them involves reactive policy.

    • jtablerd@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Ah lots of statements not backed in fact here. Mr Monkey is an accelerationist. Bye now.

  • Veraticus@lib.lgbt
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    ‘No Way To Prevent This,’ Says Only Nation Where This Regularly Happens

  • Fishe_stix@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    The president again parrots “assault rifle” and magazine capacity bans, which only pushes actual reform further out of reach. We lack a centralized database of ownership, private sale registration but we are able to keep a computer database of prescription medications so a kid doesn’t get his Adderall a day early. We register cars regardless of type of sale and require a license to drive but firearms are freely sold by private sale with no requirements to register or license the user. We suspend driving privileges for nonpayment of debts, but you are expected to be honest about being a fugitive when filling out ffl forms. If we don’t treat firearms at least as seriously as cars, why does the magazine capacity matter? Why do people who can’t define the term assault rifle calling for reforms based on nuanced features of firearms.

    This cycle just repeats. Someone tries to ban magazine size or something they know nothing about and any chance of meaningful reform is over. I would gladly submit to more stringent background checks, registration, and proof of competency. But when the conversation starts out with banning scary black rifles or magazines over 10 rounds I know nothing will change. These suggestions are worthless and make gun owners unwilling to engage.

    Imagine we wanted to cut down on traffic crashes so the suggestion is made by someone who does drive to limit fuel tank size or ban “sports cars”. Of course no one can define sports car, and gas tanks don’t make people drive recklessly, but the person proposing the law doesn’t know anything about cars. Car enthusiasts would roll their eyes and consider the attempt a joke. But instead we have speed limits, vehicle registration, driver license requirements, and safety standards that actually make cars safer. You can own a Porsche, but if you break the law your registration will be used to find you and your driver’s license in jeopardy.

    Americans aren’t going to give up guns. But there is hope that current technology could better regulate ownership and usage. Unfortunately idiotic hollow statements about magazine size and the assault rifle boogy man make those who could facilitate change look foolish.

  • Riddick3001@lemmy.worldOP
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    “Fifteen people were killed and 94 injured across 13 states as well as Washington DC”.

    These massshootings are so out of control…

  • lntl@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    America needs gun violence so that when its military does violence, the people are numb to it.

  • frostwhitewolf@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    Just absolutely mind boggling how frequently this happens and literally nothing is being done about it. What a sick country.

    • trifictional@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      And somehow some people are going to use this as reasoning that they need more guns to defend themselves.

      • Riddick3001@lemmy.worldOP
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        “They ARE doing something about it. Financing the whole thing!”.

        No they are not. You seem also out of control, buddy.

        It’s all a mix of the second ammendment, their interpretation & execution of that law, a dominant military and guns lobby system (Billionaire$); people loving their guns, no access to good (mental) health care, which allthogether is holding their country hostage, imho.

        So yeah, its all out of control. And nothing has changed, except that it’s getting worse.

        add.(mental) healthcare

        • Raphael@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Part 1:

          No they are not

          Part 2:

          It’s all a mix of the second ammendment, their interpretation & execution of that law, a dominant military and guns lobby system (Billionaire$); people loving their guns, no access to good (mental) health care, which allthogether is holding their country hostage, imho.

          LOL

          • Dr_Duckless@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            He is not that wrong, after all switzerland too have guns and they control it with ease. They even celebrate a gun festival. where children practice shooting.

              • Dr_Duckless@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                I am not saying there swiss policies will fix USA, but why not tust try! They are not even trying to fix this shitness.

                New york have more people than Switzerland. but they also have 3x the money!!

              • Cethin@lemmy.zip
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                8
                ·
                1 year ago

                That’s why we use per capita for statistics like this. It doesn’t matter who has more people if you adjust for population. Now, you could argue density is the problem, but in less dense places in the US the rate is even higher, so…

                • Raphael@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Excellent mental gymnastics, color me impressed. You’ve almost made me think Switzerland is the USA.

            • MrMonkey@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              Great idea. Let’s make the USA a small homogeneous group and see what happens.

            • MrMonkey@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              Great idea. Let’s make the USA a small homogeneous group and see what happens.