• 520@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    16
    ·
    1 year ago

    The problem is that the NRA also actively blocks things that will actually deal with the problem, like gun controls.

    • Dead_or_Alive@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      18
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      Gun control wasn’t the subject of the article nor was it what I posted about. Why are you trying to change the subject?

      • 520@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        10
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        The NRA and school shootings are the subject of the article, and gun control is an effective solution to the latter that the NRA continuously tries to block via any means necessary.

        To use your example, it is like if those that trained people to drive also tried to block any sort of driving license program, believing that literally anyone should be allowed behind the steering wheel of a car.

        • Dead_or_Alive@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          The article focuses on the funding of gun safety, marksmanship and 4A courses by the NRA. Which is arguably one of the better applications that the NRA supports. You are either terrible at English comprehension or more likely simping hard for the anti 2A crowd.

          Your analogy is terrible, US citizens have a 2A right to bear arms. This is written into the constitution. There is no such clause for a drivers license.

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

            Firstly, Its in the Bill of Rights, not the Constitution. Secondly, it is my opinion that District of Columbia v. Heller is bad law and needs to be looked at again with a modern and ethical perspective (You as an individual are not a well regulated militia). Other countries dont have nearly as many preventable problems with firearms as the US does, but we are unwilling to discuss the problem in good faith because of a single line.

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

              Your comprehension of the English language is as far reaching as your grasp of 2A rights.

              I will try to spell it out simply. The Second AMENDMENT to the Constitution was part of a package known as the Bill of Rights which was passed after the Constitution was ratified as citizens were upset that basic freedoms weren’t enshrined in the Constitution. The First AMENDMENT to the constitution was the right to free speech which was important to Americans. Funny enough they thought gun rights were important as the next AMENDMENT to the Constitution featured the right to bear arms. There were many other AMENDMENTS guaranteed with the Bill of Rights but these were the first two.

              Amendment change or modify the Constitution and are considered part of that governing document when ratified.

              Millions of 2A supporters will not compromise on any of those rights guaranteed by the Constitution.

          • 520@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            6
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Really? You’re unable to find the correlation between this article, which talks about a school shooting, and the NRA, which has repeatedly resisted gun control efforts at every step of the way, to ridiculous degrees.

            Sure, the NRA offering gun safety lessons is laudable, but in the context of also being the single organisation most obstructive of gun law reform, even when gun laws as they currently stand make such incidents ridiculously easy to commit, it doesn’t exactly wash the blood off the NRA’s hands. It’s like lauding Hitler for building the autobahn avd ignoring all the other things he did.

            Your analogy is terrible, US citizens have a 2A right to bear arms.

            The US constitution dies not grant an unlimited and absolute right to bear arms. There are plenty of guns and other weaponry that you are not allowed to own as a civilian, and plenty of other restrictions such as red flag laws, and licensing programs such as open carry permits.

            Why would a general firearms license not fall under that purview?

            • Dead_or_Alive@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              Really? You’re unable to find the correlation between this article, which talks about a school shooting, and the NRA, which has repeatedly resisted gun control efforts at every step of the way, to ridiculous degrees.

              You use this word correlation but I don’t think it means what you think it means. What kind of direct correlation is there between the NRA and school shootings? Please give specific examples of NRA funded or trained shooters.

              Sure, the NRA offering gun safety lessons is laudable, but in the context of also being the single organisation most obstructive of gun law reform, even when gun laws as they currently stand make such incidents ridiculously easy to commit, it doesn’t exactly wash the blood off the NRA’s hands. It’s like lauding Hitler for building the autobahn avd ignoring all the other things he did.

              Once again you’ve deliberately chosen to gloss over the fact that the classes the NRA provides are for the public good so you can push your anti-2A agenda. Normally I would stop reading when an individual cites Hitler in any debate. It is lazy, low IQ and diminishes the crimes that Hitler perpetrated on humanity. But I’ll make an exception in this case.

              _The US constitution dies not grant an unlimited and absolute right to bear arms. There are plenty of guns and other weaponry that you are not allowed to own as a civilian, and plenty of other restrictions such as red flag laws, and licensing programs such as open carry permits.

              Why would a general firearms license not fall under that purview?_

              There are many standing laws on the books that violate the 2A. Fortunately there have been a number of cases rolling back these infringements on our collective rights.

              Below are a few examples:

              VanderStok v. Garland. Mock b. Garland. NYSRPA v. Bruen District of Columbia v. Heller McDonald v. Chicago

              Just because a law is on the books does not make it unconstitutional. The same can be said for Jim Crow laws, antigay, sodomy, and antitrans laws that have been on the books for decades.

              • 520@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                4
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                You use this word correlation but I don’t think it means what you think it means. What kind of direct correlation is there between the NRA and school shootings? Please give specific examples of NRA funded or trained shooters.

                I’ve just spelled out the correlation, it’s not my fault you’re incapable or unwilling to read.

                Let me dumb it down so that everyone can understand:

                1. school shooter goes on a rampage with an easily acquired gun.

                2. understandable national outrage occurs, talks about new gun laws start taking place

                3. right wing organisations, most prominently the NRA, lobby against these laws and try to turn public attention against them through barefaced lies (eg: blame on videogames, media, and espousal of a bunch of theories that are either proven bunk such as ‘good guy with a gun’ or plain don’t apply (‘good guy with a gun’ in a school setting, where the good guy with a gun simply isn’t there, are too few in number and skills to contain the situation, or would simply be mistaken for a hostile actor by other good guys with guns.))

                4. proposed fixes get delayed or scrapped

                5. thoughts and prayers but no real action

                6. go to step 1 and repeat thousands of times over.

                Most other countries got off this shitshow ride the first or second time this happened. The US is the only first world country where this still happens, because they don’t put in gun control, and literal murder machines can be bought as easily as a games console.

                There are many standing laws on the books that violate the 2A. Fortunately there have been a number of cases rolling back these infringements on our collective rights.

                And the result is more bloodshed. How is that fortunate?

                Go back and read the 2A again. All of it. Notice something peculiar? The 2A explicitly states that it exists in light of the fact that armed individuals were a necessity for national security. It was written back when the US didn’t have a standing military or police force. Now that it does, there’s a pretty strong argument that the 2A, as written, should no longer apply.

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

                  Your deductive reasoning is… special. I think you and this guy would get along great.

                  https://youtu.be/sDEL4Ty950Q?si=m9i3fLvrB-1KD3TK

                  As for the 2A, you might be in a rush to give up your rights. Millions of us who exercise our rights daily don’t agree with your flawed assumptions about a society 200 years ago. The 2A is as valid now as it was then.

                  • 520@kbin.social
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    Your deductive reasoning is… special

                    Says the person who is totally okay with letting literally everyone have firearms.

                    Millions of us who exercise our rights daily don’t agree with your flawed assumptions about a society 200 years ago.

                    And there are hundreds of millions more of us that stare at the US in utter shock and disbelief when this happens.

                    You see, I don’t live in the US. Because of that, I don’t have to worry about gun violence. Because of that, our schools don’t have shooter drills and are kids aren’t forced to adopt war mindframes.

                    Like I said, we nipped it in the bud here the first couple of times it happened.

                    We nipped it in the bud with gun control. And it worked.

                    As for the 2A, you might be in a rush to give up your rights.

                    What rights? You mean like our right to safety? Our right to life?

                    Because in America, that’s all sold up river because people like you who don’t want to be inconvenienced by a bit of fucking paperwork.

                    Yes, you read that right, ‘gun control’ doesn’t mean ‘gun ban’. Even in the UK, you can legally get firearms. You just need a license, and for that you need firearms training and a valid reason, such as pest control on a farm.