• corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    That’s only one of the two mass shootings today.

    But there were 7 yesterday, and 7 the day before.

    AMERICA – THAT’S SIXTEEN SHOOTINGS IN 3 DAYS, killing 14 and wounding 78 others. THREE DAYS.

    • jeffw@lemmy.worldOPM
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      The issue is that a lot of the “mass shootings” are not terror incidents like the school shootings we’ve all heard about.

      Take the Philly one, for instance. It was covered in my local media and I still don’t quite get what happened. It sounded like a fight miles away ended up in a gunfight in South Philly.

      The type of gun violence that really reverberates in the USA is the school shooting type of incident. It’s a lone gunman who has no relation to the victims.

      • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        Why does the type of gun violence matter? Why does it matter whether or not they know the victims?

        I don’t understand the relevance to the gun control discussion.

        • jeffw@lemmy.worldOPM
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          4 months ago

          It matters for media coverage because gang wars are different than “innocent little granny shot by lone wolf”

          • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            4 months ago

            But isn’t the source of the problem the same for both? Or do you mean that people consuming the news just don’t sympathize with murders when it’s a gang war?

            I’m not trying to be argumentative, just trying to understand this because it gets brought up a lot when mass shootings happen and I guess to me, murder is murder.

            • lightnsfw@reddthat.com
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              4 months ago

              The source of the problem is crime (often due to poverty/gang culture) and mental health issues. If the source of the problem was gun owners there would be far more deaths. Millions of people own guns without ever harming anyone. Fixing healthcare so it’s accessible to people who need it, expanding social services, and fixing income inequality is the real solution.

              • AbidanYre@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                4 months ago

                Unfortunately the people opposed to gun control are also typically opposed to all those things you mentioned.

                • ArcaneSlime@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  4 months ago

                  Sure, but that doesn’t mean you should fight them for gun control instead of fighting them for the other things. You can instead advocate for those other things. Those other things are also easier tbh because they don’t require an amendment to the constitution to happen.

  • Dasus@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    4 months ago

    Any gun nut feel like arguing for insanity that are US gun laws?

    All you need to do is ignore science and reality and every other country outsider of the US and be convinced that undiagnosed schizophrenics being able to buy a shedload of semi-automatic weapons is necessary for democracy.

    All I need to do is remind you that there’s not a single piece of study that supports any of the arguments of the gun nutters.

    (Also, just because it seems to matter to these nuts, I started shooting at 12 and have handled everything from old officer’s pistols to shotguns to modern assault rifles, machine guns, grenades, mines, and even AA guns. Shooting is fun, yeah, but having fun isn’t more important than making sure children don’t have to live under the constant threat of their fellow pupils pulling out a semi-auto with a bump-stock.)

    Edit after three days: yeah, not a Single scientific study of any sort from the gun nuts, but the usual “teenagers aren’t kids and we don’t actually have any issues and I’m not reading some study, muh rights, just a gang problem” etc etc etc etc

    • SupraMario@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      Yes I to can make up bullshit…

      You’re being emotional, and that’s how shit laws get created. Your logic follows the same crap that anti-abortion groups use, it’s all based on emotions.

      And you having “shot guns” doesn’t make you an expert on guns.

      More kids die from drowning than from being killed at school by a massive order of magnitude. Why aren’t we closing pools and hot tubs? Or you don’t want to because them dying isn’t really the issue to you. It’s what was used to have them die isn’t it?

      https://www.childrenssafetynetwork.org/infographics/facts-childhood-drowning

      • VicVinegar@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        What a stupid comparison. Guns have one purpose - destruction. You can talk about all the things you can do with guns, but their intended purpose and design is to destroy. The better they destroy shit, the more valuable they are. They’re nothing without that. Pools and hot tubs are not that, and provide value to families and communities in other ways. Also, it’s water. Literally water. And many areas have building codes surrounding pools and their safety. Mainly fences and safety covers. Homeowners insurance is also more expensive when you own a pool. Does that stop every child from drowning? No. Do we know how many times a child was saved because a pool was legally required to have a fence or safety cover? Also no. Also, there is no one running around with pools or hot tubs in their pockets drowning children en masse.

        • SupraMario@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          4 months ago

          What a stupid comparison. Guns have one purpose - destruction. You can talk about all the things you can do with guns, but their intended purpose and design is to destroy. The better they destroy shit, the more valuable they are. They’re nothing without that.

          Yep, no argument there, but that wasn’t my point.

          Pools and hot tubs are not that, and provide value to families and communities in other ways. Also, it’s water. Literally water. And many areas have building codes surrounding pools and their safety. Mainly fences and safety covers. Homeowners insurance is also more expensive when you own a pool.

          You do know how many laws there are on the books for firearms right? It’s over 20k laws in state and federal gov.

          Does that stop every child from drowning? No. Do we know how many times a child was saved because a pool was legally required to have a fence or safety cover? Also no.

          What’s the point of this? You don’t know how many kids on average are stopped by a safer either.

          Also, there is no one running around with pools or hot tubs in their pockets drowning children en masse.

          Again, so it doesn’t matter that 950 kids a year on average drown, because that’s just the deaths you’re willing to take to have access to a body of water right?

          • VicVinegar@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            4 months ago

            None of that was to say it doesn’t matter, it’s to say it’s a stupid comparison. We can work on drownings and work on gun deaths at the same time. They’re two completely different problems. If I said too many people died in car accidents, you wouldn’t say “well what about cigarettes!? Don’t care about lung cancer then huh?” Yes. They both problems. Such different problems it’s stupid to compare them. Pool safety also isn’t a divisive political issue that’s winds up in the news because people would mostly agree on common sense pool safety. There’s no group of fenceless pool enthusiasts protesting for their right to own a pool that a child could easily drown in. We would consider those people idiots.