You must log in or register to comment.
Well because here you can get treatment for your mental and physical illness without ending up in debt for the rest of your life
Accessing mental health services in the UK is a nightmare though.
Was in a deep depression. I have good Healthcare and tried to make an appt with a psychiatrist to take care of it.
6 month waiting list… I thought US Healthcare was supposed to be better than this?
Still cost me $300 when I finally got in too since it’s a specialist… Fml
It’s also a nightmare in much of the US if you are not rich or happen to have excellent insurance. Having to wait six months to receive a bill you can’t afford isn’t great.
Agreed. I’m just pointing out that it’s not lack of access to mental health services that’s preventing gun deaths in the UK, it’s lack of access to guns.
It’s basically impossible in the US.
I couldn’t leave the house for 5 years becuase I was terrified of people, and when I finally went to see a GP for help all I got was “well I can’t sell you a pill to fix it so I’m not going to do anything”.
Hahahahaha! Mental illness treatment? In Canada? Got insurance to cover that or years to wait?
This part is no better than the USA (and surprise surprise, it’s mostly privatized!)
years
u mean a couple weeks, right? or have you never left bumfuck, Missouri?
In Canada you can wait years for a psychologist in the public sector.
Even when americans hate guns they can’t help revolving their entire mentality around them.
The UK and Canada have similar occurrences, but not in the vast number as the United States. We all understand the access to firearms is the problem.
Except for all the people trying to deflect blame from firearms by blaming mental illness. Without any will to actually address mental illness, of course.
It’s all about the access to firearms.
How do you effectively remove firearms from the equation at this point? Doesn’t the US have something like 120 guns per 100 residents? I don’t want to be the guy tasked with taking someone else’s gun away, that sounds incredibly dangerous. It also doesn’t seem fair to task someone else with that duty.
I won’t disagree that it’s a problem, but I don’t have a solution either.
Every country that currently has gun control laws, at some point didn’t have gun control laws and did have an armed population
They all managed to pull it off, the USA is unique in thinking this is an impossible task. And they haven’t even tried
Every country that currently has gun control laws, at some point didn’t have gun control laws and did have an armed population
Many of those countries had only an armed aristocracy, and they made those laws to keep firearms out of everyone’s hands before there were hundreds of millions of armed people.
Removed by mod
Interestingly enough, you can still purchase rifles and shotguns in the UK… you can even purchase an AR-15 or a Beretta ARX 160 legally in the UK so long as it’s chambered for .22LR and approved by the police. You just have to tell them it’s for a shooting club; not self defense.
When the UK passed their laws, it was more targeting handguns.
One of the biggest problems around guns in America is the culture. Dickbags seem to want to associate manhood with the usage of this one specific type of tool.
Removed by mod
Yet you have provided no possible options as to take action. Nice work on the reply. 👍
To provide actual discussion:
Increase rigor for screening on all firearm purchases
Removal of any and all “gun shop loopholes”
Voluntary, no questions asked, buybacks on any firearm
Two of these make it harder for new guns to enter the equation, while not making it impossible for a reasonable adult to get one, and the final drastically lowers the number of guns in circulation.
Voluntary, no questions asked, buybacks on any firearm
That’s already a thing for the most part. You can walk into any gun/pawn shop and sell your gun there and they’ll be happy to take it off your hands AND pay 5x more than a gun buyback program from the state.
Removal of any and all “gun shop loopholes”
That was never a thing. The “loop hole” was selling private party since no individual person has access to the NICS.
The reason you’re going to get more for a gun at a pawn shop or gun shop is because they’re going to resell them. The idea with a government initiative would be to decommission the guns.
It’s my understanding that the term “gun show loophole” is used is because it was/is a common enough practice to meet at gun shows and sell as private sellers, thus bypassing the requirements for bg checks.
I also realized now that I typed gun shop instead of gun show, so sorry if that caused confusion, I’m going to blame autocorrect.
The reason you’re going to get more for a gun at a pawn shop or gun shop is because they’re going to resell them. The idea with a government initiative would be to decommission the guns.
Now you had all of that energy and resource that went into making the gun + the energy required to destroy it vs letting someone who actually wants it, and it mentally OK using. And what if it’s a historically significant firearm? Trying to destroy guns is not going to get firearms owners on your side.
Opening up NICS so the average Joe selling private party can double check the person they’re buying it from would be a huge step forward. That’s a win win for both sides.
That’s a viable start, and both of your suggestions I am in favor of, but it will not remove the millions of firearms that are already in the hands of 1/3 of the U.S. population. It would also not prevent someone from 3D printing a ghost gun. Considering that some gun owners are also handloading / reloading their own ammo at home, you would effectively need to ban the sale of all smokeless powder as well. However, even in doing that, it would not take back the millions and millions of rounds that people already have.
Right. And these are all valid concerns, but they exist everywhere. The end of the day, you’ll actually never remove firearms from the equation, and I’d argue you really shouldn’t. The idea is to limit the access to either people who are damned and determined (3d printers, home gunsmiths and reloaders, etc) and those who are somewhat qualified.
The end of the day, you’ll actually never remove firearms from the equation
Agreed.
It’s not perfect therefore we shouldn’t do anything
Removed by mod
The fact that real kinder eggs are illegal because of safety concerns and guns are not is mindblowing.
It is easier to get a gun in the states than it is to get a kinder egg with a little toy in it.
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
I’ve yet to see a solution come to the table. That’s my point. There certainly are plenty of people making claims that it needs to be done, but no one to provide the “how.”
deleted by creator
Try how? Go on, what can I do right now today to start fixing the problem? See if you can answer without an insult.
Removed by mod
Nah.
You can’t, but in Canadian communities where firearms are more prevalent you see the same result. Mental illness and access to firearms is a huge red flag no matter where in the world you are.
Most places solve it with buy backs and slowly tightening the vice. So that people have both incentive and time to come to terms with it before it comes to a point where they would have to fight to keep them. The crazy gun nuts are actually more talk than action, despite how often they “say” they aren’t.
We saw a lot of those gun nuts actually take action back on 1/6/2021. I wouldn’t write them off.
Those weren’t gun nuts, those were Trump nuts.
A large percentage of them probably are, but they where there because of Trump, not guns.
That venn diagram is pretty close to being a circle.
On one side yes, on the other side not so much.
I guess it would be more of an oval at that point.
It’s the same people.
Not many, statistically. And I bet even fewer next time.
Are you counting on a “next time?”
I still would. It’s not like ignoring it has been making it better. Many other countries solved the problem exactly the same way. A steadily ratcheting buyback does work for 90-95% of gun owners. And yes you are left with the crazies that are most likely to actually do terrible things with their guns, but at that point they will already be criminals before they even shoot… so it makes things alot easier.
That’s another problem I have with simple baning of guns all your doing is disarming the responsible folk as what are you going to do with the people who fight back with said guns and what about the people who hide their guns or people that get guns illegally you have to remember that there are people that break the law
Historically, old America looks very different from the current one. I look at things like our transit network being entirely train-based, and now being completely car-based. That is a HUGE change driven by demand.
The point is just that large, glacial changes over many years are by no means impossible if we’ve set it as a target and there’s motivation. Nobody ever barged into a railway company’s office and said “We’re tearing up your lines by force and there’s nothing you can do about it.”
What kind of argument are you making here? Rail lines were torn up by force. Vehicle manufacturers bought up all the public transit systems in the US and destroyed them to increase dependency on cars.
And then they lobbied hard to make it illegal to cross roads outside of crosswalks, they lobbied for highways and road expansions, and manipulated the public into believing that real freedom comes from owning a car.
None of that was truly driven by real demand, the system was manipulated to increase car dependency to the benefit of the car manufacturers.
Why not both?
A part of the problem, not the only aspect.
The German police uses less bullets every year than the average policeman in the US.
Yes you read that right, the entire German police, all of them.
Removed by mod
When in the history of humanity has anyone, anywhere in their right mind thought, “You know what we need here? More police shootings!”
I’m begging you, for your sake, think about the things you write before you post.
Why?
Not that I’m that connected to German day to day events but it’s not that country is rampant on street violence.
No tolerance for nazi scum. Never, not once not one little bit.
Fuck off.
Have you been to Dortmund and that area? They have a pretty big problem with Nazism.
What are you talking about? I have been to Germany and it was great.
Im picking up what your putting down… the german police force needs assult rifles.
I didn’t put it down, it was taken down.
The German police needs fewer nazis!
Everybody knows that sane, law abiding citizens become mass murderers the moment they hold a gun in their hands.
Yes, limiting access to the tools of murder will decrease murders caused by those same tools, but it does nothing to eliminate the murderous intentions of those people.
If we truly care about people’s well being we should be doing both, reduce the risk of senseless shootings and massacres (gun control) and assist those with murderous intentions and other mental health issues who, believe it or not, are also victims of our sick culture and so-called societies.Nah, we don’t very much need to worry about the murderous intentions, as long as they’re not able to put them into action.
That’s the problem, guns let people turn those intentions into actions very easily.
The Nice, France truck attack resulted in more deaths than someone shooting pseudo-automatic high capacity magazine rifles into a crowd of hundreds of people from an elevated position for like 30 minutes straight in Las Vegas
People in Europe can easily enact their murderous intentions, they just seem to not have them at anywhere near the same scale
The fact that a bag o’ guns enables one lone nutjob to carry out an attack comparable to a targeted attack from an organized terror group / government kind of proves the point that guns are in fact the problem.
It doesn’t exactly take an organized terror group to rent a truck and get one single pistol, anyone with the will to do it could have committed that attack
Well whenever we have a massive problem with frequent mass killings involving trucks we can talk about truck control too.
Fair enough, at least you are honest in your selfishness.
It’s better for all concerned. The would-be murderers have the opportunity to reconsider and seek help before they’re in jail for life or killed by the police.
I would argue that gun control is more immediately actionable and greatly reduces the capability of the mentally disturbed to commit atrocities of such scale at such a common rate.
Long-term? Yes, access to mental health care and a culture that encourages receiving it will help immensely. But that takes time and will ultimately not save nearly as many people as gun control would. We need both, but gun control can happen today.
deleted by creator
I’m not saying it will, I’m saying it CAN. If suddenly there were an armed militia of private liberal citizens who were protesting outside the capitol buildings and offices of enough pro-2nd amendment congresspeople, laws would be passed very quickly to make that not happen.
deleted by creator
Most of us don’t want to be murdered by the local police or CIA
deleted by creator
I would argue that it isn’t immediately actionable until we amend the constitution. Gun control is being stricken down all over the place, and honestly that’s an appropriate application of the foundational document. If you want real gun control, that is the high bar you need to cross.
Congress could absolutely amend the constitution and control access to guns faster than we could solve the mental health crisis.
Have you ever seen anyone arguing against mental health help? Only one of the two solutions you mentioned has a bunch of idiot fighting against it.
You also can’t make mental health illegal overnight. People are born with mental health issues, it’s not something they buy at the store or grab from their fathers closet.
Ban guns, ban guns now. Fuck gun culture and fuck all gun owners (even the responsible ones)
I understand your point, but everytime I see someone pointing at mental issues, it just seems to be like they will point at anything except the guns. We can thoroughly take care of the more complicated part of the problem once the easy part has been solved and they are killing childrens with knives instead of bullets.
Have you ever seen anyone arguing against mental health help? Only one of the two solutions you mentioned has a bunch of idiot fighting against it.
No, the same group of people fights against BOTH the solutions.
Reagan is responsible for gutting our mental health infrastructure, and Republicans vote against increasing funding consistently.
They won’t support restrictions on gun ownership because they say the problem is mental health, but they won’t support spending on mental health either. (Most likely because they seem to oppose anything that would actually help people who suffer.)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mental_Health_Systems_Act_of_1980
https://sociology.org/content/vol003.004/thomas.html
This last one is a ddg search - you can just pick which article you want to read about Republicans voting against mental health funding.
https://duckduckgo.com/?q=republicans+vote+against+mental+health+funding
What if I want to hunt so I can eat meat without supporting factory farming?
Just playing devils advocate here, I agree we need gun control in the US. But saying “fuck responsible gun owners” seems pretty black and white.
It seems to me that the media loves to latch onto gun stories to further polarize the US. Divide and conquer is the oldest trick in the book. Republicans don’t want anyone thinking. They want emotional reactivity and sensationalized, impulsive retorts with lack of reasoning from both “sides” and nothing close to nuanced thought.
Do you really think no one else in the world is hunting?
Copy any weapon possession law from another first world country and it’s already a great step in the right direction.
This is the perfect example of a strawman fallacy. I didn’t say no one else in the world was hunting. I asked a question. Interesting how your first reaction is to immediately attack a position I didn’t take. That’s what I mean about the impulsive responses.
In any case, which laws from which countries are you referring to specifically?
So, to summarize, your answer to the question is people should be allowed to own guns to hunt with restrictions?
This is the perfect example of a strawman fallacy. I didn’t say no one else in the world was hunting. I asked a question. Interesting how your first reaction is to immediately attack a position I didn’t take. That’s what I mean about the impulsive responses.
You asked a question that is very easily answered by looking at any other country. Which is why I referred to any other country.
Nothing about that is an attack lol
In any case, which laws from which countries are you referring to specifically?
Take Germany’s laws for example.
So, to summarize, your answer to the question is people should be allowed to own guns to hunt with restrictions?
Yes, in a model similar to Germany. Which means you can only purchase weapons made for hunting, you need to be a trained and licensed hunter, your weapons needed to be unloaded and locked away any time you aren’t hunting, no every day carry, etc.
I need to specify fuck all gun owners because everytime, one comes out of the woodwork talking about how he likes the hobby and he keeps his gun safe. Well his hobby is leading to unnecessary deaths and he should grow the fuck up. If you want to eat meat without the factory, raise it, bow it, trap it, fish it or go vegan. People don’t deserve to die because of some snowflake that only eats wild game or some loser that built his whole personality on aiming a stick.
That being said, there is an easy compromise; no private ownership of guns. You want to have fun shooting clay pigeons, rent the gun at the range. You want to spend time with the boys shooting hogs, rent the gun at the hunting ground. But it’s a non starter because that takes away the whole power thing and that’s the real reason people are so obsessed with the damn things.
I guess people really can’t have this conversation without it being super emotionally charged. I mean, you can kill a person with a bow too, I don’t think that’s really a viable solution, it’s also a dangerous weapon. Anything you use to easily kill an animal can be used against humans, and arguably should be regulated too. And not everyone has the land, money, and resources to raise their own domestic animals for food.
Insulting people who want to ethically eat meat and anyone who owns a gun is what your going for here, but I don’t see where the “snowflake” remark comes in. It’s a big jump to say someone who wants to hunt to avoid factory farming has their entire personality built around it and to minimize their attempt at ethical food consumption by calling it a “hobby”. And saying “fuck all everyone who does X” is usually a pretty unhelpfully broad generalization that lacks scrutiny. You’re using the “attacking someone’s character” fallacy.
Renting a weapon to hunt seems like a decent solution, but who is qualified to rent or safekeep the weapons? Then they’re just in someone elses hands. What criteria do we use to judge who’s capable of renting them out?
My point is it’s a complex issue, and anyone who says it’s so easily solved by doing “this one thing” isn’t considering every angle.
The personality part is aimed at people that think having easy distribution of weapons is justified by their choice of hobby(not hunting but gun range).
You can’t kill a crowd of people with a bow.
The current ownership restrictions can be used for hunting. Anyone that clearly isn’t fit to use it doesn’t get to. The difference is it’s not sitting in someone’s closet where an innocent child, angsty teenager or jealous spouse can just pull it out. If you’re in the middle of a psychotic episode, the guy at the counter just won’t rent it to you.
You aren’t getting real responses because we’ve heard it all before. They are weak arguments, as if you didn’t know the simple difference between a bow and a gun.
So no, it’s not complex. Guns are dangerous, they are being misused. The negatives of everyone having access to them outweigh the benefits by a huge amount. Ban them.
I am one of these people who think the only meat you should eat is hunted by yourself. Not just because of the animal rights violations in the farming industry but also because birthing something to eat it is immoral in my eyes and I feel there’s a weight that comes with killing something. I don’t count hunting with a gun as hunting, its simply unfair, there’s no challenge and the animal doesn’t have a chance. If you can’t make it yourself in nature, you shouldn’t use it. I’m okay with bringing knives n all but I personally prefer to make them myself.
What about gun owners who support restrictions and bans? There is a small group of us. Also gun owners who need to have them for their job as police, security, or soldiers? Farmers and Hunters have legitimate reasons, too. The government are never going to give up guns. Neither will criminals. The cat is out of the bag on them. We will never be done with guns until a better alternative is developed like the phasers from Star Trek or something. So saying fuck people for just owning a gun is a bit shortsighted, at least in my opinion.
What about gun owners who support restrictions and bans? Sorry, I’m over here busy caring about DEAD CHILDREN. I don’t give a fuck if you want to keep your happy fun times playing with dangerous weapons as if they were toys. Grow up, this is bigger than your hobby.
It’s crazy how many activities are available to us in this modern age that don’t involve potential death.
Obviously, I’m not talking about police or the army. I don’t care about farmers and hunters, they can learn to trap it, bow it or fish it.
How many innocent people are you willing to cut down so you can have your fun. Put a number on it. Less than 100 school children per year and we get to keep our guns? Sounds gross doesn’t it?
What about gun owners who support restrictions and bans? Sorry, I’m over here busy caring about DEAD CHILDREN.
People need kidneys, it’s sad but decreed yet this Senator’s hoarding one more than she needs I offer this bill and I hope you’ll vote “aye” Unless, of course, you just want PEOPLE TO DIE!
Traffic deaths have many crying with fear Over 30,000 people are dying each year this modest change I propose must be applied Unless, of course, you just want PEOPLE TO DIE!
Alcohol deaths are exceeding comparisons Black people, white people, Native Americans We need to ban alcohol, it can’t be denied Unless, of course, you just want PEOPLE TO DIE!
Murders are bad. They have no defenders yet many are committed by repeat offenders I say lifetime in prison, whatever the crime unless, of course, you want PEOPLE TO DIE!
These car deaths I mentioned are terrible stuff It just doesn’t seem that one seatbelt’s enough Either vote for my act so that fewer will cry Unless, of course, you just want PEOPLE TO DIE!
The carbs. The container. We cannot ignore Whipped cream’s killing more people than ever before This bill would be passed and be ratified if those people there didn’t want PEOPLE TO DIE!
None of those things are remotely comparable to guns lol. Nice try but adults are able to easily spot rhetoric.
I don’t understand what the kidney one is about.
Cars are central to our society, it would collapse without it(although I’m completely for phasing them out). Their main use is transport, not killing people.
Everything else you mentioned only affects the person using it and killin isn’t their main use. My neighbor can’t kill me because he’s mad about his job and is eating too much whip cream.
Guns are made to kill. People are using it to kill innocent people. No one needs a gun(except certain professions and I’m clearly not talking about banning it for then). Go back to posting pictures.
Nice try but adults are able to easily spot rhetoric.
Are you okay there buddy?
No one needs a gun(except certain professions and I’m clearly not talking about banning it for then).
name a profession you think needs a gun more than the working people need guns, please.
That’s easy since working people don’t need guns.
Infantryman, swat, police(but the UK policemen don’t have them so probably not after a few years of a gunless society), ice cream truck driver
Did you read my comment? I said I would vote for restrictions or bans. That means I would give up my gun. I am not the reason guns are so freely available in the US. Since that’s the way it is, I figured I’d face reality and learn how to use them. It’s not a hobby, I live in a place with a lot of gun crime. I would prefer if they weren’t so easy to get, but here we are. I’m going to continue to choose to live in objective reality here, and if/when restrictions or bans are actually feasible in this country I’ll be all for it.
You are naive if you think there is no legitimate hunting use for them. I don’t think you understand how important hunting is in certain parts of the US. It keeps the ecosystem from collapsing in more rural places.
Username checks out
Have you ever seen anyone arguing against mental health help?
Yes, several times. Even this meme implies that arguing for more and better mental health services as a solution to massacres is foolishly wrong. Also, another reply I got here says:
Nah, we don’t very much need to worry about the murderous intentions, as long as they’re not able to put them into action.
You also can’t make mental health illegal overnight. People are born with mental health issues, it’s not something they buy at the store or grab from their fathers closet.
I think you are a bit confused about what I’m suggesting here, or I’m not understanding what you mean with this.
Ban guns, ban guns now. Fuck gun culture and fuck all gun owners (even the responsible ones)
We can thoroughly take care of the more complicated part of the problem once the easy part has been solvedYou think banning guns is the easy part? History has shown us time and time again that prohibitions don’t work. Even if possession of a single firearm was punished with death people would still own and trade them as it happens with drugs in places where its punished with death.
Gun control or even prohibition is like a small umbrella under heavy rain, you dont get drenched but you still get wet. We need a raincoat, a hat and rubber boots.
To be fair, better metal health services is not an absolute solution either, there are plenty more stuff we should improve in order to achieve a real solution.Lol, guns aren’t an addicting substance thats consumed, you can’t make guns easily with veggies and a vat. It isn’t comparable to alcohol or the prohibition.
And again, it becomes clear that anyone arguing for other solutions just wants to keep their guns, they don’t actually care about the situation or how it’s affecting people.
Get a better hobby than aiming a stick at paper targets. It’s menial, pathetically simple and is leading to real problems for zero gains except to your ego. GROW UP.
you can’t make guns easily
wrong
anyone arguing for other solutions just wants to keep their guns, they don’t actually care about the situation or how it’s affecting people.
false dichotomy
It isn’t comparable to alcohol or the prohibition.
there’s a direct comparison.
Get a better hobby
It’s menial, pathetically simple and is leading to real problems for zero gains except to your ego. GROW UP.
Nope, fuck you. We will not ban guns, and there is nothing you can ever do about it. Our gun rights are set in stone.
I know it’s hard since you have built your personality around it and without guns, everyone becomes stridently aware how uninteresting you are but it’s necessary for society so deal with it.
Your snowflake feelings aren’t more important than innocent lives, loser
My feelings about it are irrelevant, and you have no idea about me except your strawman bad guy concept that you imagined. Ad hominem attacks are inherently weak.
I support all rights for all Americans, and will continue to do so perpetually. The US Supreme Court has confirmed the individual right to own firearms in triplicate, and the amendment that right is supported by will never be repealed since it requires 3/4 of the 50 US states to ratify. You can deal with that with your own feelings one way or another, which are also irrelevant to the facts of the matter.
You support all rights except the one to feel safe in public places.
The supreme Court is busy dismantling abortion rights, they are obviously not a beacon of sanity and justice.
Believe what you want but your little hard-on for gunpowder is costing innocent lives.
Also, get off your high horse. You started your reply literally with a fuck you, it’s a bit late to cry about me calling you a snowflake lol
Nope, you don’t get to speak for me. I alone represent myself and I have done so with my former statements of fact.
I will remain on this high horse because it was YOU who started with “Fuck You” to all gun owners. I responded proportionally.
Regardless of who started, it makes you a hypocrite to try to call me out on it when you exhibit the same behavior. That’s more my point.
Also, it’s not a good thing to stay on a high horse. The expression means you are being arrogant and snoby but you do you.
If fires are happening because of so much gas around, and matches that people are lighting, you limit the amount of matches AND the amount of gasoline.
Most gun owners live in a paranoid fantasy world with a hero complex. I’ve heard some wild shit come from the mouths of people who own guns. Many who do own them should have them taken away. It’s mostly brainwashing and less about mental disorders with these people.
Isn’t it interesting that tons of people own guns in America and DON’T shoot people? Or the fact that we had crazy people and assault weapons previously without mass shootings.
Looking at these issues as if they’re either-or is ridiculous. Of course you’re going to need a multivariate approach. You’re not going to get rid of the guns, and you’re not going to get rid of crazy people. We need to address gun laws, mental health laws, and societal collapse overall. There’s no singular approach that will fix everything.
ah the pro-gun weirdo lemmings have come out once again.
If you go far enough left you get your gun rights back
ah the fucking horsesh
oeit theory.no you don’t, the only purpose of guns is to kill someone, that is not very respectful of their bodily autonomy, is it?
You’re stopping short on the “kill all landlords” scale, there
guillotines exist mate and much harder tp shoot up a school with them
Do a search to find out who said the following:
“Under no pretext should arms and ammunition be surrendered; any attempt to disarm the workers must be frustrated, by force if necessary.”
the only purpose of guns is to kill someone, that is not very respectful of their bodily autonomy, is it?
Yes, if they aren’t respecting your rights, they have forfeited theirs
Removed by mod
Jesus Christ… Where’s the humanity? They called you a pro-gun weirdo lemming (reddit ≈ redditor; lemmy ≈ lemming) and nowhere did they state or even suggest that you were subhuman. Suggesting someone might deserve an active shooter? Nah man, fuck you all the way to Pluto and back.
Btw, I actually agreed with your original message. It’s your response to the comment that I’m criticising.
all the way to Pluto and back.
Interrupting just to say Pluto is an effing planet.
Carry on.
Username checks out
I think they were referring to the Underworld of the Roman Pantheon
I think they were referring to the Underworld of the Roman Pantheon
Exotic, but possible.
He called me a lemming. Fuck him.
a pro gun weirdo lemming.
If that’s how he’s gonna talk to me I’ll talk shit back.
We are all lemmings here. Lemming is colloquial slang for a person who uses Lemmy. That’s all. I think you replied to yourself, btw.
He still called me a pro gun weirdo for saying you’re not going to be able to disarm America. If that’s the level of discourse, then America deserves school shooters.
Lemming, because you’re on lemmy?People on reddit are called redditors, no? People making content on YouTube are called YouTubers. People who stream are called streamers. I’m sure there are more.
I could see the “weirdo” part being offensive, but I’m confused why you’re upset about the lemming part. This is on lemmy. We are all lemmings, technically.
It would be like using discord and then getting upset with someone for calling you a discord user.
Ngl the lemming thing went over my head too, so thanks for explaining
New to Lemmy. Don’t call me a lemming. The connotations are insulting.
Also if you dismiss my perfectly cogent argument as being from a weird pro gun nut…then fuck you go die in a fire, you’re not here to discuss you’re here to insult. In which case if you wanna get nuts, let’s get nuts. I hope the baby Jesus pisses on their corpse
You won’t get real far with an attitude like this. Tit for tat and turned up to 1000. You’re clearly very defensive over being called anything and still need to figure out who exactly you think you are. If some simple name calling (“lemming”) is enough to make you fly inyo attack mode like that and wish an active shooter on someone, you’ve still got a very long way to go.
Not defensive, dismissive. Simple prisoner’s dilemma. I start off nice. If you’re not nice back, then die in a fire.
well… it is a mental health problem. Plus culture. Switzerland has guns and just as many people with mental health problems as the rest of the ‘developed’ world, but almost 0 shootings.
Canada, too. We have a FUCK ton of guns.
We just can’t open carry them (or own handguns), so it’s not in our pockets next to our phone. When it’s at home locked in your hunting case, it’s off your mind, and you don’t think about pulling it out when people piss you off.
Because of this, we also don’t have people feeling the need to buy guns to defend themselves against other people with guns in their pockets next to their phone.
On the other hand, guns don’t kill a lot of people in most european countries (even the ones with very little gun control)
I don’t think any European country comes close to the level of lack of gun control in the US though
I mean sure, the US has almost no gun control, but in austria for example you don’t even need a permit for a lot of lethal weapons.
I think it’s really a culture problem, but that doesn’t mean you shouldn’t regulate guns a bit
There are mountains of gun control laws in the USA. Saying the USA “has almost no gun control” is ridiculous.
Yet you can buy a semi-automatic firearm privately without a background check.
Yep that that will always be the case, regardless of what the law says. There is no way to enforce background checks on private sales without 24/7 video monitoring and analysis on every person, just like any other form of prohibition that doesn’t work.
Except for all the times it absolutely works, which is why the pro-gun community can’t buy landmines and RPGs.
The US has a very strange and, in my view, troubled relationship with guns.
What transpires out is that most americans are still attached to the notion of solving problems at gun point and delivering justice through acute lead poisoning, like in the initial settling and further expansion of the country, with no care nor concern for rule of law.
If that were the case, you’d be able to point to a significant amount of daily firearm violence - above and beyond every other form of violence.
It doesn’t matter how permissive their gun laws are, nor how few mass shootings they have under them – they have gun laws that are broadly agreed to be safe for the public.
This is true for every country in the world except America.
It doesn’t matter if they are more permissive because their “culture” is less bloodthirsty or because their mental healthcare is better or they banned video games and doors. They have the social risk under control.
When it turns out they don’t have the risks under control, such as following mass shootings in Australia and New Zealand, they change the laws.
They even loosen those laws occasionally to make things like hobby shooting at ranges more accessible.
None of that for America though! No matter how great the risks of their gun laws grow, no matter how clearly inappropriate they are for the current state of American society, the gun lobby demands that laws only get more dogshit.
So Republicans make it happen for $16 million a year and the pro-gun crowd cheer them on because they don’t want to be mildly inconvenienced to save the lives of people they don’t give a shit about.
they have gun laws that are broadly agreed to be safe for the public.
This is true for every country in the world except America.
So clearly you don’t know about current gun laws in the US. You must be willfully ignorant to think that America does not have gun laws that are broadly accepted by the public
“Broadly agreed to be safe for the public” isn’t the same thing as “broadly accepted by the public” but sure, I guess all the mass shootings, armed criminals and child suicides are just because you’ve made everyone so damn safe
Not what I said at all, try again
So clearly you don’t know about current gun laws in the US. You must be willfully ignorant to think that America does not have gun laws that are broadly accepted by the public
It’s literally exactly what you said, verbatim. Are we really supposed to trust you with guns and gun laws?
Finland, Ukraine(not including war). In some way Russia, where even if you don’t want, good unkle Voenkom will give you gun anyway.
Removed by mod
Oh. Ok.
I’m not sure how you’d argue a background check and being of age at a minimum as a lack of firearm control.
TBF it took Europe two wars and 100 million dead people to get that shit out of their system.
Yeah and the US never finished their Civil War.
Which European countries have very little gun control? I wasn’t aware of any european country in which anyone can just carry a loaded gun around in public for no reason.
Call it a mental health problem, a societal health problem, whatever. Unless we accept that wanting to slaughter the people around you is an unfixable natural quirk of some people’s human experience, then this cannot be purely a gun control issue.
The fact that you keep arguing how much of a gun control issue it is amongst other contributing factors is almost as big if the reason as the lack of gun control. Its been more than 20 years since Columbine, grow the fuck up and start doing something, WHICH INCLUDES gun control
It includes more appropriately addressing actual underlying issues.
This shit is a recent phenomena and I asked myself what changed since the 90s? That’s when this shit really started popping off…
Only thing I can think of is access to the internet. Before that, struggling kids were benign by themselves. But now they have open access to others like them, and they can foment together. Throw in copy cat behavior and access to guns, that’s the recipe.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mass_shootings_in_the_United_States
It really isn’t. They are happening more frequently, but that’s to be expected with the population boom that we experienced. There were mass shootings in the 1800s in this country, and that’s not counting anything we did to the native Americans.
Sounds good.
The gun control crowd can stop mass murderers, criminals and domestic abusers from buying legal, semi-automatic weapons (as well as dumbshit gun owners leaving unsecured firearms around to be stolen or used in their childs suicide).
This will keep everyone much safer while the pro-gun crowd get to work on curing every mental health issue forever, fixing wealth inequality, banning video games and schools with too many doors and whatever other things they think are the root of the problem.
Until they do, indiscriminately selling guns to people clearly isn’t working.
Personally, I don’t want to believe that wanting to brutally murder people around you is an innate human characteristic.
Oh, cool - we’re pretending there are no other differences between the countries listed, e.g. healthcare, social safety nets, etc. that may or may not have been shown to be an unavoidable majority of the underlying issues.
Gotta enjoy the meme circlejerk though, eh?
What, you don’t love neolibs arguing that they need to disarm the masses they’ve kept in squalor?
Because it’s the only moral thing to do, obviously.
From the article…
If we explain this problem as pure evil or other labels like terrorist attack or hate crime, we feel better because it makes it seem like we’ve found the motive and solved the puzzle. But we haven’t solved anything. We’ve just explained the problem away.
From other comments, healthcare and mental health resolutions are no picnic in the other listed countries either. Some places handle it a bit better, but the US is not alone in abusing its sick.
deleted by creator
… or anywhere else, except the USA.
Removed by mod
wtf is a consoler
better be some kind of empathetic stripper
Non, it’s a guy, who plays exclusively on console.
if this is a consolor ship then where is the xbox?
chokes dude
chokes dude
Just can’t understand what passes for porn these days.
And it does lead to mass shootings but Americans have to think they are special
It can be surprisingly difficult to get a therapist in the US if you don’t have insurance. Honestly, I found the process remarkably frustrating even with insurance.
I don’t know what it’s like in the other countries listed, but they all have much better healthcare systems than the US, so I imagine it’s much easier.
deleted by creator
Genuinely.
Have the best insurance - Want a therapist in two weeks? It’ll be a one hour long phone call.
Want in person? Join a month + waiting list
Dont have the right insurance? Fuck off or pay $200 cash.
And thats for the basic Talk Therapy or if you’re lucky Cognitive Behavioral Therapy route. Want a specialist for a specific issue? Waiting list.
I advocate for books - you can get the therapy + mindfulness setup from a CBT Book for Depression/Anxiety and 10℅ Happier or Eckhart Tolle. Videos are great these days, even Tiktok sometimes. I think HealthyGamer has the best vids.
Well there is another thing they all have in common…
They’re all dirty commies! At least that’s what Fox News told me.
Running statistical analysis on the data now. Preliminary results suggest video games as the main causal effect.
Are you sure it’s not Dungeons and Dragons and that heavy metal music?
And don’t forget about Tarot cards and Astrology!
Are you sure it’s not vaccines? Either the vaccine the shooter took made them do it, or if they weren’t vaccinated the vaccines in the people around them!
For the record, we have video games, D&D and tarot cards up here in Canada.
No you dont Canada is a frozen wasteland populated exclusively by Moose. Except Newfoundland their real.
deleted by creator
I don’t think you mean it to be, but everything you’re saying is total bollocks.
Particularly the part about guns per capita
The Swiss aren’t perfect, mind. They didn’t let women vote until the 70s ffs. My point being that these kinds of comparisons simply don’t work. The US has a unique problem. But the problem is still solvable through gun control, because gun control can pervade culture, as demonstrated by many other countries.
Removed by mod
Dog there is 1.5 guns per american
Those rifles are transferred to civilian ownership once they are discharged from the military.
Happy to see a source that says otherwise but it’s illogical that because you previously served your gun is somehow “still in the military”. Especially given that virtually anyone is free to own a gun once they’ve discharged.
So most countries have 70% less guns, but 100% less shootings.
Math still doesn’t math.
For a non-linear graph of gun deaths x guns, it absolutely does.
deleted by creator
What I said isn’t a myth though. They weren’t allowed to vote until the 70s. All suffrage movements start and end somewhere and there’s ended later than most in Europe. Over 50% of men in Switzerland voted against women voting just ten years prior to them getting it.
Which lends exactly to my point: if we’re to pick something to judge Switzerland by, it’s something like that. Not misinformation about guns per capita.
deleted by creator
An earlier referendum on women’s suffrage was held on 1 February 1959 and was rejected by the majority (67%) of Switzerland’s men
This isn’t a myth and saying “it’s one canton” doesn’t absolve the people who voted overwhelmingly against women being able to vote.
The result is right here: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/1959_Swiss_referendums#:~:text=The first was held on,approved by 62%25 of voters.
I just can’t figure out for the life of me why you want to defend this or keep calling it a myth.
deleted by creator
I didn’t say anything about them being “last”. You make a lot of stuff up for someone who cares about facts.
But the problem is still solvable through gun control, because gun control can pervade culture, as demonstrated by many other countries.
How likely do you believe it is to bring about the constitutional amendment necessary to ban firearms? To gain support of 2/3s the states in addition to a 2/3 majority in Congress?
That aside, you could argue symptoms could be addressed through such extremes if it were possible to do so, but you couldn’t argue such measures address underlying issues - solve problems.
Yeah I’m not arguing for a ban, not even for the reasons of political support; it’s simply unworkable due to the “genie being out the bottle”.
Removed by mod
Look, gun politics aside, there is a legitimate reason to have more than one hunting rifle.
30-06 is great for hunting deer, but would be an extremely poor choice for hunting squirrels and raccoons, considering that there would be very little edible material left.
Removed by mod
30-06 is great for hunting deer, but would be an extremely poor choice for hunting squirrels and raccoons, considering that there would be very little edible material left.
Tough shit. Learn to bow hunt.
You realize that’s like trying to tell someone to pick up their newly purchased big ticket item from the store using a bicycle, right?
I get you’re trying to limit the use of guns by limiting the availability of guns and their ammo, but where you drew the line is too extrene/limiting.
At that point you might as well just be honest about it and try to make guns illegal.
Removed by mod
Nope. Take it or leave it.
Just repeating myself at this point, but …
At that point you might as well just be honest about it and try to make guns illegal.
And for the record, I am pro gun control, but what you’re advocating is too extreme to be practical and workable.
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
must prove a need
Ahhh… Racism it is, then.
ammosexuals
Ah, I see we’re using conservative tactics in making an “other” group demonize and alienate.
I always say that this is more cultural than anything else.
In the sense that culture is a complete lack of social safety nets, affordable and accessible healthcare and community support resources, broken ERPO laws, etc., sure.
You could argue rampant media oversensationalism of such violence glorifies it and further incentivizes it to those seeking to commit such a gruesome suicide, but that’s less culture and more partisan wedge-driving and profiteering off ad revenue.
I’m just criticising how they handle and view guns.
How do you believe we view firearms? I’m interested in hearing how we can do whatever the heck [we] want.
Just relax with the guns and emulate their Swiss brethrens who are self-disciplined about handling guns. Rights come with responsibilities.
It’s fortunate, then, that the vast majority of firearm owners are responsible.
deleted by creator
Aren’t ammo, like, super regulated in Switzerland though ?
Removed by mod
deleted by creator
