• rjs001@lemmygrad.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    1 year ago

    No, not really. Those things are unrelated. I care for the other people and am not the one doing these shootings. The claim otherwise is ridiculous

    • SuckMyWang@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      That lion is attacking those people but it’s not me doing it therefore by doing nothing to help or prevent it I’m showing them that I care about them.

      • rjs001@lemmygrad.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        What else can I do to stop it? The mental health crisis is caused by actions of bosses and politicians. I am neither and can’t stop child abuse or bad working conditions that may trigger these. I am not a shooter’s parent and tell them not to purchase a firearm

        • SuckMyWang@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          I don’t know and I probably shouldn’t be critical considering this. From what I can gather from your comment is that you do care. You can at least identify and admit there’s a problem so you’re miles ahead of a lot of people. Take steps for better work conditions and treatment when you can, not just for yourself but for your colleagues, help each other out, be kind, vote for good selfless people who care about those things you mentioned.

        • captainlezbian@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          Yeah. I vote for people trying to fix these issues. I try to encourage responsibility with weapons. If I were queen of America I’d discuss with experts what the least restrictive means to prohibit these shootings are and work with them to solve it. But nobody is actually in charge here, we all are and none of us are. There is an incredible gun culture here to a degree that I really don’t think anyone but the Australians can relate to. They had a leader make the unpopular decision to get rid of the guns. Our leaders legally can’t. We can’t have a revolution to ban guns because we don’t have the support or the guns on our side. To change the law 2/3 of our states and our legislature have to agree to repeal one of our most culturally significant and politically relevant parts of our constitution. Meanwhile our lifetime appointed Supreme Court is striking down gun control laws

          • R0cket_M00se@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Not only that, but it’s the bill of rights, if you can take away the second amendment what’s to stop authoritarians from taking the first as well? Or modifying it to preclude certain religions from the establishment clause?

            • NOPper@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              1 year ago

              I see what you’re saying, but the 18th amendment would like a word. The whole point of the Bill of Rights is to be a living document that adjusts as time goes on. Preferably to make this a better country for everyone.

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

                When was the last time Congress passed a new law, much less an amendment? They’re bought and sold by corporations to ensure that nothing, but the bare minimum to keep the government limping along, will ever get done

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

                  So from what I can tell there’s a system which allows for change but there is insufficient will from many areas as to why change hasn’t happened. So let’s compare Australia’s mass shooting with the American population. From what I read there was 18 million people in Australia in 1996 at the time of the mass shooting that killed 35 people which lead to gun reform. If you were to take the same proportion against the US population it would be the same as a shooter legally buying guns and then killing around 580 people. Do you think change would occur if this happened? Very disturbing if that’s the limit of peoples tolerance of such crimes.

          • rjs001@lemmygrad.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            Gun control wouldn’t help. Banning marijuana and cocaine didn’t stop it and way more people like guns than those. It would also only serve the rich and disarming the working class would just lead to them losing rights hard fought for

            • letsgo@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              1 year ago

              It did in the UK. Not only did we ban guns, we also made carrying them a criminal offence. Nobody, not even crims, now casually carries guns around, because they know if they get stopped and searched, and the gun is found, they’re heading straight to the clink. So the only people that carry guns are (a) the few that have a genuine reason to, like airport security, and (b) crims carrying with intent, and the latter can get chucked into the clink directly with the gun carrying being direct proof of that intent.

              But you go on believing gun control doesn’t solve these problems if you want. The evidence from everyone else that has tried it is that (a) it works and (b) we’re not going to throw our gun control out on the grounds of it being useless, because it isn’t. Of course it doesn’t solve the problem 110% and there are OCCASIONAL, SURPRISING news reports about a shooting, not the routine business it is in the USA.

              And your comment about combatting the bourgeois is just ridiculous. they’ll just come after you with a bigger gun and more security than you can shake a stick at. Sure you might pop something off at one of them but the rest’ll blow your arse away in no time.

              This argument is hardly worth having anyway. Once America decided guns were more important than kids’ lives the gun lobby won. When you’ve decided kids are more important than guns we can talk further.

              • rjs001@lemmygrad.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                1 year ago

                The ruling class can only be combated with weapons. Peace isn’t an option. Your claim about them blowing you away anyway is laughable. Have you never opened a history book? We tried to ban marijuana and guess what? It still is quite common. And guns are thousands of times more popular and supported than marijuana ever will be. Guns existing help kids lives. They allow a brighter future where they won’t be forced to work 14 hours a day. I’m more concerned with that than the tiny minuscule amount of people killed in mass shootings.

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

                  They allow a brighter future where they won’t be forced to work 14 hours a day

                  Going to need some sources on that one, bud.

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

              I agree but it’s also the closest thing to whatever has helped. When I set aside American exceptionalism and ask what has worked it seems that funding social services, opposing right wing radicalization, and banning guns are what worked in other countries. I would much rather start with the first two and I’m conflicted on the last because I’m aware of the importance of arming the oppressed, but it is hard to deny the effectiveness that other countries seem to have found in banning guns. There’s just so many mass shootings, it’s exhausting and it’s been happening since I was a kid and I’d just really like to get to the point where someone shooting up a school is a shocking act of evil instead of a routine one.

              • rjs001@lemmygrad.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                But it’s not a worthy trade off. Without guns the working class would have no way to combat the bourgeois. Not to mention that criminals would still have access to them. I’m not willing to hand over all of the working classs’ political power just for a little temporary safety

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

                  I understand how people can come to that conclusion and I was there for a long time and am currently questioning my position, unsure where I’ll land.