• @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    691 year ago

    Yes, let’s not rush into to taking any sort of precaution to protect our kids. Much better to have this wild West situation we have going on now just in case me, Clyde, and Peepaw need to go toe-to-toe with the US Government in some sort of hypothetical hyperbolic David vs Goliath scenario. Totes makes fucking sense, dunnit.

    As a gun owner, I recognize how absolutely lax the gun laws are. Let them make it harder to buy a gun. It won’t hurt you. At least then I know fucking “Off-His-Meds” Jeb down the street from me won’t be able to buy an AR-15 and mow down my family because my weeds keep “blowing on his lawn” or whatever inane shit he constantly yells as me about.

    Maybe you could stop being susceptible to all of the gun lobbyists arguments and learn to think for yourself at some point. I don’t know. That’s just my 2¢. Maybe once you have a kid or grandkid going through school your tune will change.

    • tygerprints
      link
      fedilink
      11 year ago

      Exactly. Let’s not even raise a finger to do the minimum amount to stop guns getting into the hands of impulsive kids or men to begin with…lets just give a gun to every motherfuckin’ buttwipe out there and let everyone shoot at whoever they want. Eventually one person will be left, with nothing but a ruined earth to comfort themselves. And maybe that’s truly what should happen, poetically justice speaking.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      -61 year ago

      The only times I see pistols is when I see policemen.

      The only times I see machine guns is in the hands of policemen at the airport, or when extremist groups are demonstrating and need protection by the police.

      Why would I even need a gun, when hardly any criminal owns one?

      The concept of gun ownership is flawed in itself.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        171 year ago

        There’s nothing inherently wrong with gun ownership. However, there is a shit ton wrong on how we handle distribution and tracking of them. We have more prerequisites for operating a vehicle than we do a firearm, and in a country where we have a SIGNIFICANT number of mass shootings, we are doing SIGNIFICANTLY little to fix the issue.

        Gun ownership is totally fine. I bought a handgun and a shotgun on the same day (after someone tried to break in and attack my wife - they didn’t realize that I had just come home from a trip) and was blown away that I could just walk right out the door with them within a few minutes. A rifle for hunting is also not an issue.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          111 year ago

          Fun fact: handguns are used in mass shootings more often than AR15s. In fact, all rifles, of which AR15s is merely the most popular type, are responsible for ~500/60,000 gun deaths/yr in the US. Probably because, as you may guess, handguns are a lot more concealable than rifles.

          Also, be fair about the buying process, you still went through the National Instant Criminal background check system. Sure instant checks don’t take long anymore due to Al Gore inventing the internet in the 90s, but they do still happen and adding arbitrary length does nothing to stop crimes. In fact even if they did, they don’t stop nor are they designed to stop the types of planned attack we’re talking about (mass casualty events), they are to stop “crimes of passion” (guy killing his wife), and there’s some contention that they effectively do that as it isn’t like the couple necessarily receives the proper counseling, so he just picks it up and does it next time he’s in a wife killin’ mood, or if he can’t wait goes all Chris Benoit or that “Stairs” jerkoff.

              • Flying SquidM
                link
                fedilink
                English
                01 year ago

                There is a difference between regulated and highly regulated?

                • @[email protected]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  11 year ago

                  Crimes like straw purchasing or lying on a NICs form are punishable by 10yr in prison, federal prison in some cases. I’d say that’s pretty “high.”

                  • Flying SquidM
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    01 year ago

                    You know what would be a lot higher? Not letting mentally ill people or domestic abusers, or people who have shown to use them in an unsafe manner around children have access to them. But apparently that is way too far in America.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          81 year ago

          I cannot relate to that. I am 37 years old and I think I have never witnessed violent crime, except in television or on playgrounds (children are assholes to each other!)

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            11 year ago

            Yeah, it was terrifying. Like the guy knew she was there, we had just put the dog outside, so they were obviously watching the house. They tried to kick in the front door, and I ran to the front door have naked and half asleep. The terror slammed full force into me when I realized someone was at our door (could see through glass), and I had no weapon to deal with them. They ran as soon as they saw me. I had just gotten home late the night before, so they obviously knew that I wasn’t home, and the knew that my wife was.

            It still wigs me out to this day.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              -31 year ago

              How long does the police need to arrive at your home? For me in case of an active break in it would probably be around 120 to 180 seconds. So this usually only happens when nobody is home, it’s too dangerous otherwise.

              Someone stole my e-bike from the back yard. And I have heard of break ins in cellars. But that kind of crime that you describe is very very rare.

              Does that mean that gun ownership is a side effect of a security system that has flaws in itself?

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                English
                51 year ago

                National average response time to emergencies is 11min, 23 to non emergencies. In the cities it’ll be “less” (maybe, and not much), but in the country it could be hours.

                • @[email protected]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  01 year ago

                  That’s long. 😱 For non emergencies I have waited long times. Like 40 minutes or even hours. But when I called the fire department once it came like 30 seconds after I had hung up. And it was just a smoking trash can, nothing really dangerous.

                  • @[email protected]
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    41 year ago

                    Fire dept is a bit quicker I think but they only protect you from fires of course, also, analogous to firearms, fire extinguishers are good to have on hand if a fire breaks out. Also, fortunately the fire often doesn’t actively prevent you calling the fire dept, though often due to the nature of being victimized violently you won’t be able to even call the police until after the event unless you’re lucky, you often have to focus on fighting or running in the moment.

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                English
                2
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                People are not always logical. Even if the cops could get there within 2 minutes, that’s still 2 minutes that you have to deal with someone that is intent on doing harm to you. I wouldn’t want to risk that.

                The police also have no legal obligation to protect you. Meaning if there is a situation that they consider “dangerous” they might not even enter the house to protect you. Like…I’m not hedging all of my bets on a cop to protect me. Because there’s still a chance that I lose.

                I understand your point that there’s not really any point to having weapons when we have a “protector”, but we’ve already seen that those “protectors” have no obligation to actually protect you if they feel endangered. Guns are tools. A rifle is a tool to provide food for yourself. A handgun/shotgun is a tool that you use to protect yourself. We just shouldn’t hand those tools out to literally everyone that wants one.

                • @[email protected]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  31 year ago

                  Here, they are less afraid because almost no household is armed. It is a dangerous situation to enter a home, but they always come in pairs and might do so with guns drawn.

                  But we are talking about very extreme cases. German police shot 14 people in 2017, 11 in 2018, and 15 in 2019. So about the same amount of people that die from lightning strikes. The vast majority of policemen do not discharge their gun in their whole line of duty.

                  If you compare likelihood of violent crime the bigger danger comes from people inside your house, rather than burglary. Therefore, weapons in houses would make life more dangerous here, since you are less likely to escape your step mother armed with a gun, than your step mother armed with a kitchen knife.

                • @[email protected]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  21 year ago

                  PS: I don’t know your step mother. Maybe she is a world class samurai swordswoman. I apologise if my analogy insulted her.

                • 【J】【u】【s】【t】【Z】
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  -11 year ago

                  Yeah but my dude, before any of this happens, you’re way morelikely to just lose your shit yourself and murder yourself or one of your family or more.

                  Live by the sword die by the sword I guess.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        251 year ago

        Every other country has a FRACTION OF A FRACTION of the amount of shootings that we do, and you have the gall to sit there and go “none of what you said or propose will stop someone”, when politicians and gun control groups have literally proposed NUMEROUS extremely common sense fixes to help curb the violence. It’s fucking loons like you that rally against it ad nauseum because “DeMs CuMmInG fEr MuH gUnS!1!”. You’re nothing but a gun lobbyists mouthpiece who would rather let kids get killed so you can keep an overpowered AR than try LITERALLY anything to help alleviate the situation.

        No one is coming for my shotgun, or my handgun, or my hunting rifle. Literally no one will ever pass a law that will ban those. Red flag laws WORK. Mandatory withholding periods WORK. Banning AR weapons and bump stocks would be a step in the right direction. Pushing these laws on a federal level would help. Would it stop everything? No, but it would provide a LOT more opportunities to catch someone before it happens.

        Fuck, do something to help our kids, don’t be the barrier that makes it more difficult.

      • MonsterHighStan
        link
        fedilink
        71 year ago

        So what do you think is going to decrease school shootings? What are you proposing or support that will improve the situation?

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            3
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            So basically… Fix every other nearly impossible to fix problem first before even deciding to do anything about the actual guns, if anything at all?

            And to be clear, by impossible to fix, I mean politically, not that these problems are actually unsolvable.

              • Flying SquidM
                link
                fedilink
                English
                21 year ago

                So you’re plan is to try and tackle something that’s written into the constitution… that’s your goal?

                You mean like slavery?

                  • Flying SquidM
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    11 year ago

                    Nope. I’m equating slavery to tackling something in the constitution and changing it. You know, the thing you just implied was not something that could be done. I’m sure you know that and are obfuscating.

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                English
                11 year ago

                I didn’t specify a plan one way or another. I just think it’s crazy that the talking points you presented seem pretty clearly designed to just kick this issue down the road, cause at least that way you still get to have your guns.

                And believe me, solving all those things you mentioned would be great. But why not also try and do something about the major gun issues at the same time too?

                  • @[email protected]
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    11 year ago

                    We do have a societal problem. We also very much have a gun problem.

                    And proposing all these other things you know won’t get accomplished is a way to shift all the responsibility away from the gun issue itself.

                    And you aren’t being emotional about even the thought of some more gun control or anything to even tackle that issue head on? Come on.

          • MonsterHighStan
            link
            fedilink
            11 year ago

            Those are all fantastic suggestions. In my opinion we absolutely should be taking much more drastic measures to decrease school shootings in the meantime, as nearly everything you suggest would still take at least ~15-20 years to see results. Any dead kid is too many and there are way too many school shootings.

            • prole
              link
              fedilink
              English
              1
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              No, not crickets. Those things sound great, let’s do them. We should do everything we can, and that also includes stricter gun laws.

              Not term limits though. It may sound like a good idea, but I implore you to research issues with term limits.

                • prole
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  11 year ago

                  Term limits will seal the deal to the end of our Democracy.

                  Either you’re arguing in bad faith, and know this, or you’re refusing to inform yourself of the downsides.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            01 year ago

            And you can end with bringing your gun regulations up to speed to every other developed nation.

        • tygerprints
          link
          fedilink
          01 year ago

          Nothing will improve the situation until we make a concerted effort to shut down gun manufacturing and distribution, even forcibly removing them from the hands of criminals any way we possibly can. And since the kid-killers at the NRA won’t allow that, the answer is - this problem of mass murder in schools is only going to intensify until everyone’s child is at risk and can no longer attend public schools of any kind. And that’s only the tip of the horrific iceberg of a shitshow that’s coming to our country.

            • tygerprints
              link
              fedilink
              11 year ago

              I am as leftist as any human being ever could be - and damn proud of it. Saying the truth always seems like “going off the deep end” to people who aren’t able to comprehend. I consider your remark proof of that.

        • tygerprints
          link
          fedilink
          11 year ago

          Actually with the new proposals to remove firearms from anyone with any kind of criminal background or mental health disorder, and the law being amended to allow this, there are ways to effectively stop people from having firearms. It’s simple humanitarian guidelines that need to be enacted. Only a churlish dolt would refuse to see the common sense of keeping guns out of the hands of men and boys.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            11 year ago

            Since you asked me this twice, I will not answer it again. But I will touch on the black market part, no one can enforce the black market and that’s why it’s called the black market. but just because the black market exists doesn’t mean legal market shouldn’t. if you think a firearm shouldn’t have to be registered legally because it’s possible to get it illegally, then you are missing the whole point of laws and civilization, and I’m not really sure why you’re here.