|
SneezeOfTheDecade posted:Electric Boogaloo was misremembering; the "hundreds" figure was worldwide, not limited to the US. But we still see 25-30 trans women - overwhelmingly black - murdered each year in the US for being trans. And yeah, by and large their murders go unreported and when they do find their way into the media, the reporters generally use the victim's birth name instead of their chosen real name. It's almost certainly much, much more than 25-30 a year. As the dude above mentioned, most murders of trans folks get written up as a murder of their assigned gender with their birth name. Like most parts of the country have no real data around anti-trans crimes because it's literally impossible to report a crime and have the police take it seriously and make a report if you're trans.
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2020 15:40
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 9, 2024 22:25 |
|
|
SimonCat posted:I could see that if it was their legal name.  Reporters use chosen names all the time when it's, say, a celebrity
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2020 15:41
|
|
|
Mr Interweb posted:Source? Here you go. It is the top result when you search for "people of color in the military" on google. Lots of neat stuff there. https://www.cfr.org/article/demographics-us-military quote:How diverse is the military?
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2020 15:44
|
|
|
Balliver Shagnasty posted:Consider this counterpoint. There’s a reason these kinds of groups aren’t active nowadays though, even though guns are even easier to get than they were. The only people exercising second amendment rights en masse are wealthy whites. If anyone else tried to do it they would be literally extinguished as terrorists. Conflating that with self defense (which guns are ineffective at statistically), is ridiculous. And claiming we shouldn’t expand gun control with basic common sense poo poo using these justifications is a dodge at best and performative wokeness and disingenuous at worst. And yeah I got dingusy there, I got ganged by bad faith for a few minutes and lost my cool. Sorry.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2020 15:51
|
|
|
-Zydeco- posted:
Wrong. That example you gave is more like removing steering control the faster you try to go. It's a good law because it fashions an assault rifle in a way where it has to be used more of a 'sporting' rifle. It addresses firepower by limiting the ability of a shooter to put shots on target quickly and accurately. You couple that with magazine limits, and it's good.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2020 15:52
|
|
|
Doctor Butts posted:Wrong. That example you gave is more like removing steering control the faster you try to go. The standard rifle of the US Army in WWII is legal under most "assault weapon" bans as it does not have a pistol grip and uses an 8 round enbloc clip.  Removing a pistol grip doesn't do a thing for how deadly a weapon is.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2020 15:55
|
|
|
SimonCat posted:I could see that if it was their legal name. Do you think if Lizzo got hit by a van tomorrow, the newspaper headline would be "Melissa Jefferson Killed in Hit and Run"? Call people by the name they use, it's not that hard
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2020 16:08
|
|
|
Doctor Butts posted:Wrong. That example you gave is more like removing steering control the faster you try to go. this is a bad analogy. removing the pistol grip makes the gun slightly less ergonomic and the controls are slightly harder to reach but you're not really making it meaningfully harder to shoot or reload or anything. you're better off with magazine limits and things like that.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2020 16:10
|
|
|
SimonCat posted:The standard rifle of the US Army in WWII is legal under most "assault weapon" bans as it does not have a pistol grip and uses an 8 round enbloc clip. ”A was good for X back then, so it's just as good as Y is for X now” is a bad argument. If pistol grips have no positive effect on effectiveness of pistols and assault rifles, then why is it immensely popular? kidkissinger posted:this is a bad analogy. removing the pistol grip makes the gun slightly less ergonomic and the controls are slightly harder to reach but you're not really making it meaningfully harder to shoot or reload or anything. you're better off with magazine limits and things like that. So it has no effect on how easy it is to keep aim on quick successive shots?
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2020 16:20
|
|
|
TyroneGoldstein posted:Heyo, another POC progressive: I'm A-OK with guns because I'm fuckin terrified of where white people are at, at the moment. Sounds sort of glib, but I've thought about this a lot, especially putting my time down South into perspective. I know that I'm basically insulated from a whole bunch of it because I live in direct orbit of NYC, but yeah, not taking any chances. Arming everyone to ward off violence has really worked out well so far in the US, no reason to change anything. I'm sure everyone being armed will usher in a leftist future any second now. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2020 16:21
|
|
|
SimonCat posted:The standard rifle of the US Army in WWII is legal under most "assault weapon" bans as it does not have a pistol grip and uses an 8 round enbloc clip. tbh I'd feel a lot better if weird white dudes were trying to larp as 1940s us infantry than as some 2020 tier 1 operator poo poo because at least the 1940 guys knew to shoot nazis
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2020 16:21
|
|
|
theflyingorc posted:Do you think if Lizzo got hit by a van tomorrow, the newspaper headline would be "Melissa Jefferson Killed in Hit and Run"? Who is Lizzo?
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2020 16:25
|
|
|
hanales posted:There’s a reason these kinds of groups aren’t active nowadays though, even though guns are even easier to get than they were. There are plenty of similar groups that still exist, it's just a uniquely white suburban phenomenon to be dense enough to think that literally anyone wants you walking around with a loaded loving assault rifle in public.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2020 16:25
|
|
|
While it's pretty loving rude to dead-name a murder victim it also makes it really hard to track statistics on trans-related crimes if you conveniently erase the fact that they were trans from the data.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2020 16:25
|
|
|
SimonCat posted:The standard rifle of the US Army in WWII is legal under most "assault weapon" bans as it does not have a pistol grip and uses an 8 round enbloc clip. That's a rhetorical question, BTW. The answer is, those things make a rifle much more effective at killing or injuring lots of people in a short amount of time.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2020 16:31
|
|
|
I’m definitely pro-self defense. Bands of people beating up (or at least scaring off) perpetrators in their community sounds ok to me, as long as they get the right people I guess. I’m also of the opinion that guns cause more harm than good though. Gun suicides are incredibly common, especially with handguns. In abstract a handgun can be used for protection, but I feel like it’s more likely to take your life than to save it. If it was obvious that handguns were a benefit to their owners then I couldn’t argue that banning them makes sense. But from a public health perspective I just see no alternative; to me handguns are actively harmful. Im slightly sympathetic to the argument that it’s just not possible because of the entrenched gun rights and gun culture in the US, not to mention the current stock of firearms in this country that won’t disappear overnight. At least to me we should try, a lot of good policies are extremely difficult in the US but we fight for them anyway.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2020 16:34
|
|
|
J.A.B.C. posted:As a gun owner, put more stringent checks on them. Make it around the same level as owning a vehicle, at the absolute least. Hunters could receive special permits to waive fees on specific hunting weapons. Owning an AR-15, if not outright banned, should be along the lines of getting a CDL with endorsements. The fees for the license can go into a national database for background referencing, and law violations lead to automatic seizure and revocation. Make any weapon with a detachable box mag an NFA Title II weapon, pistols and rifles. Bam, done. (Also if you removed Short-Barreled rifles and shotguns from Title II and modified the Hughes Amendment to allow limited sales/imports of currently unregistered MGs, you might even get a decent number of people to go along with it)
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2020 16:35
|
|
|
The fixation on assault rifles always seemed odd to me considering that handguns can shoot a lot of bullets before reloading, are easier to conceal and are more commonly used in murders. Plus the fact that they're easily the most effective firearm for committing suicide
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2020 16:39
|
|
Jarmak posted:Who the gently caress do you think is running around targeting trans people? Bernie Bros? .... chuds? nazis, maybe? idk
|
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2020 16:39
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/atrupar/status/1219612446710730766 https://twitter.com/joshtpm/status/1219464488174473217 also trump poo poo on greta and climate change activist during the speech.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2020 16:39
|
|
|
Lambert posted:Arming everyone to ward off violence has really worked out well so far in the US, no reason to change anything. I'm sure everyone being armed will usher in a leftist future any second now.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2020 16:40
|
|
|
Andy Richter had a quote awhile ago that summed up American gun culture. Paraphrasing, "How dare you infringe upon my stupidass delusion that one day I will be Rambo"
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2020 16:41
|
|
|
hanales posted:There’s a reason these kinds of groups aren’t active nowadays though, even though guns are even easier to get than they were. I keep coming back to this: quote:Also you didn’t actually list a successful example. Your friend doesn’t need a gun, if mace or a taser wouldn’t be effective a gun likely wouldn’t either. It just “makes them feel better”. And I think to myself, "is simply running away the most effective form of self-defense? What about instances where there's nowhere to run?"
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2020 16:42
|
|
|
Taerkar posted:You can also remove 7-10% from a Rasmussen poll to get a more accurate number. The interesting thing is that that 51% poll was even an outlier for what statisticians consider a bad poll and he's back at 47% (where it usually is) on it today, roughly the same as Obama at this point in his presidency. This basically means he probably checks a bad poll that is the most favorable to him (and still not 99% of the time) every single day and cherry picks the rare days it happens to be at 50% or above. Maybe being tied with or sometimes 1% above Obama in the same poll is also deemed as being as good as at exactly 50% sometimes....or maybe it just means that Rasmussen is a bad loving poll if two completely dissimilar presidents have somehow followed largely the same trajectory. Or most likely he doesn't even see the whole poll and just what's fed to him since there's other parts to it like the one that has never had him at a higher disapprove that approve at any point in his presidency much like all the others. Kale fucked around with this message at 16:45 on Jan 21, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2020 16:42
|
|
|
oxsnard posted:The fixation on assault rifles always seemed odd to me considering that handguns can shoot a lot of bullets before reloading, are easier to conceal and are more commonly used in murders. Plus the fact that they're easily the most effective firearm for committing suicide I mean ideally deal with both, but how many idiots did you see playing dress up soldier yesterday with handguns vs ar-15s. Clearly there's two issues here: how do you reduce gun violence and how do you keep a bunch of wannabe militia types from being able to intimidate people
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2020 16:43
|
|
|
SimonCat posted:Who is Lizzo? And if you honestly don't understand the simple rear end point being made, just replace "Lizzo" and "Melissa Jefferson" with "Sting" and "Gordon Sumner" or whatever dumbass dad rock poo poo you recognize.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2020 16:43
|
|
|
Jethro posted:Then why isn't the M1 still the standard issue rifle of the US Army? Why does every modern military rifle use pistol grips and detachable magazines? Because a pistol grip is more comfortable for a wider range of hands to hold.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2020 16:44
|
|
|
T. Bombastus posted:Hey I think we should ban all guns but this is disingenuous. Clearly the point that Tyrone et al are trying to make is that we haven't armed everyone-- guns are currently held primarily by privileged groups. Yea basically those who own the majority of firearms for protection exceedingly blow their risk of danger out of proportion. They're the least likely to be affected by gun crime. They're out of touch with reality. Doctor Butts fucked around with this message at 16:50 on Jan 21, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2020 16:45
|
|
|
Balliver Shagnasty posted:And I think to myself, "is simply running away the most effective form of self-defense? What about instances where there's nowhere to run?" "Run away" is also rather shoddy advice when one might not be able to outrun their pursuer, or may not be able to run at all.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2020 16:45
|
|
|
Are people super weird about guns anywhere else than in USA? Countries going through a civil war don't count.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2020 16:49
|
|
|
T. Bombastus posted:this post sucks Hey Im pretty sure they were asking a serious question. I dont know who Lizzo is either, are they a US politician? Pretty sure that's a no too. Edit: OK yeah they're a singer. What the gently caress does this have to do with politics
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2020 16:49
|
|
|
I see that the State Department also knows the secret of surveilling people with a microwave. Good thing nobody except Christopher Walken, Attorney at Law, knows how they truly work: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wcyzjrqpJ70
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2020 16:49
|
|
|
Lambert posted:Arming everyone to ward off violence has really worked out well so far in the US, no reason to change anything. I'm sure everyone being armed will usher in a leftist future any second now. Listen. When my prog and lib friends get together and talk about politics it's almost always framed in trying to save this huge experiment that we're in right now. Lefty signal output generally goes from this basic foundational assumption, whether it's fully articulated or not. The exception would be like, tankies..but who the gently caress cares about them. Right wing signal output does not do this. Every day, in the whitest places you know, there are white people being told that me, my friends, almost everyone I've known or loved in this life (I'm from NYC), everyone non-white, non-cis and non Christian out there are evil. They are told that me, just existing, is an existential threat often fueled by the dark lord himself, to destroy our precious society. These same people are armed to the fuckin' teeth. When those people get together, they talk about how I specifically am part of the downfall of our society. The leap from that to I'm going to go down and start shooting some of these n*ggers is terrifyingly small. This goes to such an extent and these people are so ill-informed, that they honestly believe that there are real, violent leftist groups operating in the United States now. They really believe that poo poo. I'll take my chances. Thanks. TyroneGoldstein fucked around with this message at 16:55 on Jan 21, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2020 16:51
|
|
|
Not to defend whoever should be responsible for compiling the statistics, but I imagine marking people down as trans post-mortem is pretty tough to do accurately. If all you have to go on is whatever is in their wallet (assuming it wasn't stolen), the police have nothing to go on when initially reporting the death, and news articles are going to report based on the initial assessment. Unfortunately, there is a strong correlation between being trans and being homeless due to how lovely our society is, and there may not be an easy paper trail to find friends- and the family might be estranged or tell the police to use the deadname. Basically, even if societal attitudes were better on average, it still wouldn't be easy to fix the under-reporting short of some pseudo-fascistic database of known trans-folks or a complete revision of ID laws/databases that seems pretty pie-in-the-sky based on current trends. Edit: I also didn't really want to get into gunchat because I'm not going to claim to be super informed, but it seems silly to pretend that oppressed minorities will ever be able to possess weapons equivalent to their oppressors. 1/4 of black families have $0 or negative net wealth, it's insane to think they can all afford a gun and the time to train with it to be better than they would be with a baton or mace or whatever. Similarly, without getting the exact numbers, the rate of LGBTQ homelessness is enormously higher than for straight people, so they aren't in a situation to easily afford a gun and a safe and training or whatever the "responsible gun owners" would recommend be the minimum requirement. On top of that, LGBTQ suicide rates are huge, and I imagine that the rates of trans gun suicides might be higher than the rates of murders in the US, though of course statistics are just as impossible for one as for the other. Basically, if you can afford to own and maintain a gun you are already doing better socioeconomically than like half of your cohort, and the people lower on the ladder are the ones more likely to be targeted anyway. This brings us back around to community policing, but even in that case the argument for guns is weak- the example cited when people got called out was people with baseball bats in vans- but no one is calling for a ban on bats. Similarly, antifa tends to go with batons and similar, because using weapons that are lethal is not great as a deterrent. Basically, unless you can comprehensively address: 1. The cost of guns for individuals, 2. The threat of suicide (which goes up when you have an easy method, don't get cute), 3. The comparative effectiveness of non-lethal weapons, 4. The relative ease of obtaining weapons for oppressors as compared to the oppressed, you are blowing hot air and trying to turn anecdotes into statistics. BougieBitch fucked around with this message at 17:08 on Jan 21, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2020 16:53
|
|
|
i worked at a chemical plant that had this fire chief who was a former Navy Seal and he taught self defense classes. He loved guns but he told everyone in our annual training that a gun is totally stupid as a home invasion defense tool. He said to get a 10 lb fire extinguisher and put it under your bed. You can shoot that stuff like 20 feet, it doesn't require good aim, and works great to incapacitate people. Plus you can swing it as a blunt weapon. Gun freaks just jack off to the idea of shooting a (brown) person breaking into their home https://www.totalfireandsafety.com/blog/tag/fire-extinguisher-as-weapon/
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2020 16:53
|
|
|
Nenonen posted:Are people super weird about guns anywhere else than in USA? Countries going through a civil war don't count. A small minority in Canada, but maybe a bigger percentage of our pop than anywhere else in the West states-aside? Due to our proximity we have the brainworms pretty badly as well and we stand a decent chance of electing a fascist next cycle.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2020 16:53
|
|
|
SimonCat posted:Who is Lizzo? Well, you see, she puts the siiiiing in single.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2020 16:55
|
|
|
Herstory Begins Now posted:I mean ideally deal with both, but how many idiots did you see playing dress up soldier yesterday with handguns vs ar-15s. Clearly there's two issues here: how do you reduce gun violence and how do you keep a bunch of wannabe militia types from being able to intimidate people For that, you'll need a major cultural shift that completely upends the foundations this nation was built on. For starters, the rugged individualism/"patriot" ethos needs to be consigned to the garbage bin of history. Then you deal with the underlying bigotry that also fuels a fair bit of this gun fetishism. And then you work hard to promote a more healthier and less emotionally-fraught view of firearms ownership that creates more responsible and cooler-headed owners. But good luck getting any of that poo poo done.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2020 16:55
|
|
|
Doctor Butts posted:”A was good for X back then, so it's just as good as Y is for X now” is a bad argument. Not as much as you might think. I say this as a rural gun guy when he was young, but it if you're explicitly firing in semi auto, it is more of an aesthetic and personal comfort choice than it is an 'increase your killing power with mad accuracy' thing. Automatic weapons are more comfortable with pistol grips to help catch recoil better, but those are already pretty significantly regulated as is. In my case, because I learned to shoot guns on rifles and shotguns without pistol grips, I'm quicker on aiming and followup shots on rifles without pistol grips. For people who learned to shoot on AR / AK platforms (like anyone who learned to shoot in the military) they'll shoot better on guns with pistol grips. It's not like Call of Duty where you can change a grip and suddenly be a better shot, it's usually the opposite because it throws off muscle memory. For what it's worth, I grew up in rural Kansas around a lot of hunters and I've hunted myself. I never felt like I needed an AR/AK type platform to hunt effectively. For Bird hunting I've only ever had a pump shotgun and for Deer we had an hand me down bolt action. Some guys brought semi-autos and did alright, but you only ever really got one shot at a time before your target bolted and you almost never had time to do followups, and spraying and praying would lead to things like gut shot deer (which can live a long time after being shot, run a long loving ways away, and contaminate the meat). It was in the hunters best interest to make a kill as clean as possible if only to limit how long they have to chase a deer after they shot it so the emphasis was on accurate single shots. If you want a better, more effective way to legislate assault weapons, don't look at pistol grips and bayonet lugs, looks at magazine capacity, refire rate (like bump stocks), threaded barrels/silencers, and ease of mechanical modifications to turn a semi auto into an illegal full auto, and poo poo like that rather than things that make it look scary in profile. DeathSandwich fucked around with this message at 17:01 on Jan 21, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2020 16:56
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 9, 2024 22:25 |
|
|
Oh yeah there's also the legacy of KKK groups getting run out of towns and beaten and humiliated so badly, over and over, that they almost completely stopped assembling in public for like 90 years. Fun fact, too, the responses to the KKK were almost always majority white, but also mixed. That poo poo was so effective that the KKK became a national joke for, well they're still considered a punchline.Balliver Shagnasty posted:For that, you'll need a major cultural shift that completely upends the foundations this nation was built on. For starters, the rugged individualism/"patriot" ethos needs to be consigned to the garbage bin of history. Then you deal with the underlying bigotry that also fuels a fair bit of this gun fetishism. And then you work hard to promote a more healthier and less emotionally-fraught view of firearms ownership that creates more responsible and cooler-headed owners. But good luck getting any of that poo poo done. gun control stuff like the guy above me mentions is already polling at like 70-80% (and is well over positive even among republicans) so it's really not about overhauling american society. Back when a significant fraction of people lived in rural areas, maybe sure. But 90+% of americans live in a place where there is zero need for high cap semi autos Herstory Begins Now fucked around with this message at 17:00 on Jan 21, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2020 16:56
|
|