6 points

Exactly why we need to address the issues that are driving people to the edge instead of just banning stuff like that’ll work.

permalink
report
reply
39 points

Banning stuff… like guns? Like every other developed nation has done? Which works?

permalink
report
parent
reply
-4 points

You got a loicense for that knife bruv?

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Knoife* FTFY

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point
*

“Hey America, I know you guys are having a domestic terrorism issue: so why don’t we make the people that contribute to society in a positive way less able to defend themselves?”

It’s like you guys willfully ignore that there are literal fascists in this country that will not give up their guns.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

On a very minor technicality, since society is a group of people, every person in that group contributes to society. Some of them contribute negatively to society but it is still technically a contribution.

All of that aside, given the recent state of human society, I feel like making property owners into felons for owning property that they legally purchased would only incentivize them to commit more felonious acts.

permalink
report
parent
reply
11 points

Many countries have not banned guns but instead have proper mental health.

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points
*

But you’re not going with the heckin narrativerino!!! Nvm Switzerland actively encourages gun ownership, or Czechia has the same constitutional right to bear arms we do (to fight off invaders like the soviets and nazis due to historical events, hm sounds familiar) or Norway still allowing gun ownership after taking tests and showing competency!!!

The heckin narrativerino!!! All social democrat nations have banned guns!!! The UK is a nation we should be mimicking!!!

Fuck these losers, make citizens lives better. Remember they can’t take your rights if they have to take your life first.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

Canada has neither, but does have more strict laws regarding guns. Could be stricter I some ways though.

permalink
report
parent
reply
22 points
*

I’m 52. Guess what we had and didn’t have when I was a kid.

  • Plenty of guns, and even laxer laws (excepting conceal carry!).

  • No mass shootings.

To be fair, I should include the mental health thing. I remember watching MTv as a teen in the late 80’s and they made a big thing of homelessness. I figured it had always been an issue but people ignored it and, as a kid, I was just then finding out.

Yeah, turns out we shut down our mental health centers. Probably a correlation there.

permalink
report
parent
reply
28 points

Let’s not forget crushing the middle and lower classes, taking away things for them to live for. That doesn’t cause you to hear voices but it certainly can’t help.

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

you could have said less mass shootings
No mass shootings though, that’s not true at all

permalink
report
parent
reply
-2 points

Did you look at that link?! Scrolling through this century, scroll, scroll, scroll, scroll…

And let’s define “mass shooting”. We have to at least agree that the definition is all over the place, and wildly different. And not, the wildly liberal source Mother Jones is on the far left. :) 6 or 818?

And I’m not hammering a technicality. What we think when we think “mass shooting” is clearly on the left of the chart.

Anyhow, shootings are clearly worse, despite more guns laws. (Excepting conceal carry laws! The gun people won’t admit it, but those laws have exploded!)

permalink
report
parent
reply
48 points
*

Gun control arguments almost always include things like mental health care and annual health reviews to prevent things like this

Edit: had a bit of a stroke in the middle of that sentence

permalink
report
reply
2 points

Gun control arguments almost never include topics like this. It would be great if they did but you are kidding yourself if you think gun control proponents push for stuff like this on the regular.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

You’re hinting at universal healthcare, and that’s socialism, boy!

permalink
report
parent
reply
85 points

I mean, a law doesn’t have to stop every criminal to be useful, if gun control causes any significant reduction in shooting deaths, it will have saved lives, even if some shootings still occur.

permalink
report
reply
39 points

What I’m getting from this post is that the only way for gun control to work is a complete gun ban. I don’t think that’s what the user was wanting

permalink
report
reply
-2 points

Lol. Lmao even.

permalink
report
parent
reply
188 points

They missed the part where he has a history of mental health issues and had heard voices telling him to kill people. He should have lost access to his guns.

permalink
report
reply
20 points

Dude was literally in a mental hospital for a while, wasn’t he?

permalink
report
parent
reply
-2 points

So according to pro-gun talking points, he should have been completely safe to arm. He received the fabled “mental healthcare” that renders people safe to indiscriminately sell guns to.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Yes, and again there was no enforcement, no gun control anywhere can work without enforcement.

permalink
report
parent
reply
84 points

Which is something gun control typically aims at

permalink
report
parent
reply
30 points

It’s something current federal law does and has done for decades. A person who is involuntarily committed to undergo inpatient treatment at a mental health facility by a court of law is classified as a “prohibited person” and cannot own or have access to firearms.

Source link: https://www.atf.gov/firearms/qa/are-there-persons-who-cannot-legally-receive-or-possess-firearms-andor-ammunition

The catch is that a person cannot be deprived of any right without due process - typically a literal day in court. Therefore an individual with mental health problems that have not caused enough trouble to land them in front of a judge can’t be declared a prohibited person.

permalink
report
parent
reply

Due process does not always require a hearing before court action. There are emergency injunctions, ex parte protective orders, temporary restraining orders, certain classes of summary process. When a guy owns assault weapons and is hearing voices, due process can wait a couple weeks.

permalink
report
parent
reply
16 points

Sorry bud, best I can do is ban suppressors and shotgun pistol grips. At least they won’t be able to shoot you ergonomically.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Ouch my ligaments.

No more murderin’ for meeee

permalink
report
parent
reply
-2 points
*
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

Nope, get fucked. You don’t get to insist that actual people get murdered month after month just because you’re capable of imagining legislation being misused.

Even disregarding how deeply fucked in the head it is to be more upset at the idea of a gun owner losing their guns than innocent people losing their lives, you could address that misuse through voting, protest or incremental reforms.

A gun owner losing access to their guns is not a tragedy even remotely comparable to a room full of children mutilated beyond recognition by a legal gun owner and “being able to murder anyone at any time with minimal effort” is not a “basic human right”.

permalink
report
parent
reply
12 points

Or you know, we could only give guns to people that really really need them instead of making a hobby out of it

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points
*

Ehhhh maybe it’s my American showing, but I’ve known lots of hobbyist clay shooters that are responsible, great people. Not to mention that hunting is more than a hobby to many; it’s a way of life. I don’t think we should police hobbies to that degree. Much moreso, we should have initial and updated background checks on gun owners.

permalink
report
parent
reply
12 points

Is every hobbyist clay shooter a good person? Is their hobby worth the lives of innocent people? Not to mention how easy it is to snap and turn bad. It sucks for the good hobbyists but idc if it means less dead children, they can shoot clay with bbs.

Background checks simply don’t work well enough to catch everyone. Mental health issues are hard to spot, it’s not like you can just do a blood test.

Honestly, there are soooo many ways to entertain ourselves in our society, people that center their whole lives around guns need to grow the fuck up imo. Fuck the hobby.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-1 points

I wasn’t aware that hunting was a hobby created after the invention of assault rifles. Pretty sure hunting has been a way of life since forever so I don’t think gun control is going to destroy that hobby.

How can you honestly be arguing hobbies are more important than doing something to protect human lives?

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

It is already federal law that any gun sale going through a federally licensed firearms dealer (FFL) is required to run a check using the FBI’s National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICs). So initial already yes, updated “if they buy more guns,” but still.

Private sales are legal in some states but if you sell to a prohibited possessor you’re in deep shit so most people will only do so with a CCW card to show you’ve been NICs checked and it hasn’t been confiscated.

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

Dude you need a to pass a test and have a license for loads of hobbies, people still do them. Even just driving a regular car which is considered a near necessity in some places, we acknowledge that it’s dangerous so you need to pass a test and can have your licence taken away if you are a danger to others.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

Sounds like you’ve let the gun lobby tell you what gun control is.

For example in Australia, to buy a gun you first need a firearms license that is granted once you’ve established that you know how to safely handle a firearm, are not a danger to yourself or others, are not a known criminal and have been a member of a club or range for at least 6 months without creeping people out.

From there, your new guns must be registered and you must be able to produce them on request. Handguns and semi-automatic guns are more heavily restricted, in line with them being far more dangerous to the public.

So do you know what you do if you don’t have a license and want to go clay shooting? You book a session at the range and show up.

No license, no background checks, no knowledge of firearms required.

Because do you want to know the dirty little secret the gun lobby has been hiding from you? Gun control advocates don’t actually give a shit if people own or use guns if they never kill, maim or traumatise anyone.

Systems like the one above massively reduce the supply of guns to criminals, the number of mass shootings, accidental deaths, suicides, domestic violence homicides.

Meanwhile, in America, the pro-gun crowds ideal gun laws can’t even stop a teenager with a history of death threats, rape threats and animal abuse from legally buying two semi automatic weapons, mere days before he used them to kill a room full of children.

That’s what gun control is trying to stop and what the pro-gun community inadvertently fights to keep.

permalink
report
parent
reply

This is how it was for the first one hundred years of American existence. “Purposive open carry.” Only lawless shit holes had what conservatives want today, habitual open carry. If it was a place with law, open carry without an obvious purpose was a breach of peace.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-2 points

He should have been in a cage.

permalink
report
parent
reply

4chan

!4chan@lemmy.world

Create post

Greentexts, memes, everything 4chan.

Community stats

  • 2.3K

    Monthly active users

  • 236

    Posts

  • 3.9K

    Comments