|
DeeplyConcerned posted:you're right it's not a mental illness. not as we currently understand it. there is no diagnosable mental illness associated with this kind of behavior. if you walk into a psychiatrist's office and ask for help because you want to mow down a classroom full of 20 kids and have no other symptoms they will tell you to hit the bricks. in fact a lot of the personality traits that are associated with antisocial behavior are actually protective against other forms of mental illness like depression and anxiety. so not only is this violence NOT associated with what we commonly understand as mental illness but shifting the conversation towards people with mental illness is totally ludicrous in this context. I think another part of the problem is that the mental illness that apparently so many teens have that causes them to shoot up schools doesn't look all that different from typical teenage edgelordism. Even on the extreme end. There's lot of teens that dress all in black, listen to sad music, get bullied in school, cut themselves, etc. Most of those teens grow out of it. A small percentage go off the deep end and shoot up a school. How can parents tell the difference between the teens that will end the former or the latter?
|
#
?
May 26, 2022 21:12
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 01:10 |
|
|
RBA Starblade posted:Bishyaler made the comparison and is using Ukraine's current resistance as an argument against gun control and proliferation. I wanted to know how he can hold that position and use Ukraine as an example why with what they also believe about the invasion of Ukraine and arming it. The flip argument can also be made, but now is not the time or place to make it.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2022 21:13
|
|
|
Probably Magic posted:The flip argument can also be made, but now is not the time or place to make it. I would agree if they weren't using it as so far the only supporting point to why this is worth it.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2022 21:15
|
|
|
Bishyaler posted:The likelihood of a GOP takeover is almost guaranteed, and a shooting war in America is greater than the possibility that you will ever ban firearms. I'm discussing things which are more likely to happen than people advocating gun bans, its a miserable reality but not wanting to accept that doesn't change the outcome. If this situation became imminently likely, owning a gun in that scenario would much more likely be used to commit suicide than being used to effectively violently resist. In the individual person's case, the best move there would still be to not own a gun Guns should be banned, which is overwhelmingly likely not to happen, I don't think anyone is arguing differently. I'm saying the smart choice as an individual to make is to still not own a gun
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2022 21:16
|
|
|
Comparing Ukraine (who is an organized and largely unified military of a nation) and a theoretical US Collapse (you in a bunker with a handgun) is entirely pointless.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2022 21:16
|
|
|
I still never understood why guns are ok for the American public to own but not rocket launchers, weaponized drones, nukes, etc. What is the fundamental difference? At least those that insist on supporting the 2nd amendment should be consistent.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2022 21:18
|
|
|
virtualboyCOLOR posted:I still never understood why guns are ok for the American public to own but not rocket launchers, weaponized drones, nukes, etc. One is actually capable against state forces.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2022 21:19
|
|
|
virtualboyCOLOR posted:I still never understood why guns are ok for the American public to own but not rocket launchers, weaponized drones, nukes, etc. You could use those to attack the government as opposed to your fellow citizens.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2022 21:20
|
|
|
Charliegrs posted:I think another part of the problem is that the mental illness that apparently so many teens have that causes them to shoot up schools doesn't look all that different from typical teenage edgelordism. Even on the extreme end. There's lot of teens that dress all in black, listen to sad music, get bullied in school, cut themselves, etc. Most of those teens grow out of it. A small percentage go off the deep end and shoot up a school. How can parents tell the difference between the teens that will end the former or the latter? First clue would be them being obsessed with guns and having clear violent tendancies. And keeping said guns at the home the parents live in like is constantly the case. Parkland, Sandy Hook, Uvalde, others. These parents always act surprised so I don't think we should rely on the parents. Unormal posted:One is actually capable against state forces. "B-b-b-buh-but the 2nd amendment was made by the government to allow citizens to take over the government! Oh, rocket launchers, c'mon I'm reasonable. Also, the 2nd says no regulations! It's not called an Assault Rifle! It's called an rear end in a top hat Rifle and you can't take it away from me."
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2022 21:20
|
|
|
virtualboyCOLOR posted:I still never understood why guns are ok for the American public to own but not rocket launchers, weaponized drones, nukes, etc. People will defend private ownership of rocket launchers more often than you think, but in general I think people are more concerned with arms they can actually afford.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2022 21:21
|
|
|
Lemming posted:If this situation became imminently likely, owning a gun in that scenario would much more likely be used to commit suicide than being used to effectively violently resist. In the individual person's case, the best move there would still be to not own a gun This is also assuming that a GOP fascist state doesn't use gun ownership cross-referenced with a list of undesirables to simply create a hit list long before anyone can organize or maintain a resistance. If we're going by historical precedent.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2022 21:21
|
|
|
Unormal posted:One is actually capable against state forces. uPen posted:You could use those to attack the government as opposed to your fellow citizens. If that’s the case, wouldn’t it be more effective to attack the right from the right?
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2022 21:22
|
|
|
virtualboyCOLOR posted:I still never understood why guns are ok for the American public to own but not rocket launchers, weaponized drones, nukes, etc. The people who are the ardent defenders of the 2nd amendment throughout history just wanted them so they can shoot black people.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2022 21:24
|
|
|
virtualboyCOLOR posted:I still never understood why guns are ok for the American public to own but not rocket launchers, weaponized drones, nukes, etc. Because there's a gun lobby. The only right that conservatives will go to the mat for is the right that involves you buying a thing. When you reduce these arguments down to money for gun manufacturers and the government contract to provide those things it makes sense. More cops: buy more guns. Arm teachers: buy more guns. Armed guards: buy more guns.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2022 21:24
|
|
|
kzin602 posted:Because there's a gun lobby. The only right that conservatives will go to the mat for is the right that involves you buying a thing. When you reduce these arguments down to money for gun manufacturers and the government contract to provide those things it makes sense. So attack them from the right then. “GOP and NRA are taking away your 2nd amendment rights. They want to limit your access so you can’t protect your family.”
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2022 21:27
|
|
|
kzin602 posted:Because there's a gun lobby. The only right that conservatives will go to the mat for is the right that involves you buying a thing. When you reduce these arguments down to money for gun manufacturers and the government contract to provide those things it makes sense. Want to shoot up a place: buy more guns which helps justify the other people buying guns.* It's like the concept of complimentary goods but the compliment to Good X is also Good X.* *don't do this. this is a rhetorical statement that shows that the gun lobby wants assholes to have guns (they absolutely do) so that everyone else is scared and "has" to buy guns so that everyone just has guns all the time
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2022 21:27
|
|
|
virtualboyCOLOR posted:If that’s the case, wouldn’t it be more effective to attack the right from the right? Only if you don't care about more people being killed. A general strike would do more damage to the government than a drone with a rocket launcher would until they start killing strikers.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2022 21:28
|
|
|
DeeplyConcerned posted:you're right it's not a mental illness. not as we currently understand it. there is no diagnosable mental illness associated with this kind of behavior. if you walk into a psychiatrist's office and ask for help because you want to mow down a classroom full of 20 kids and have no other symptoms they will tell you to hit the bricks. in fact a lot of the personality traits that are associated with antisocial behavior are actually protective against other forms of mental illness like depression and anxiety. so not only is this violence NOT associated with what we commonly understand as mental illness but shifting the conversation towards people with mental illness is totally ludicrous in this context. I'm not at all an expert on this, but isn't antisocial personality disorder a real thing recognized by the DSM? I think it'll be hard to convince the average person that anyone who would kill a classroom of kids *isn't* mentally ill.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2022 21:33
|
|
|
Bishyaler posted:I'd say that handguns are the majority of gun crime so I appreciate you suggesting gun control measures that are targeting the lions share of violence, but unfortunately according to polls I linked earlier, ~80% of Americans are against a handgun ban. That doesn't make it right. For reference, that is roughly the same percentage of Americans that disapproved of interracial marriage in the 1960s.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2022 21:38
|
|
|
The Sean posted:Want to shoot up a place: buy more guns which helps justify the other people buying guns.* They want everyone to have guns so everyone is paranoid about their fellow citizens. Destruction of faith in community and government is a conservative goal. "I'm from the government and I'm here to help you" should be a GOOD thing because working together using taxpayer money to accomplish goals is so much more effective than any corporation can ever be, and this terrifies the right and they fight tooth and nail to ensure that we can never have a repeat of the massive public works projects that defined national prosperity in the previous century. Wanting cops to get killed in a school shooting only serves conservative goals, more dead cops means more police funding meaning more oppression and more distrust.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2022 21:39
|
|
|
virtualboyCOLOR posted:I still never understood why guns are ok for the American public to own but not rocket launchers, weaponized drones, nukes, etc. The 2nd Amendment was drafted in a different technological context, with a completely different conception of how the US would defend itself, and it consistently failed to actually protect marginalized people defending themselves against the government. It’s an absurdity, and frankly no other amendment would be so vigilantly protected in the face of a public health crisis.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2022 21:41
|
|
|
Timeless Appeal posted:When you consider modern guns as we understand them didn’t even really exist when the second amendment was written, there really is no difference. Those rights were pinned while under occupation on one side and wilderness on the other, they were making a statement of defiance against the British army by stating that people can have arms and even organize a 'well regulated' milita in the interest of community defence. It makes sense in the context of also forbidding soldiers from forcing themselves into a home to use for shelter. I don't know or even pretend to know the exact meaning of that infamous comma. Do they mean that arms are only allowed by militias? By anybody 'well regulated'? Or what but the original meaning makes it clear for the REASON to have arms. I don't believe that semi auto rifles fall within that reason and even if they existed at the time I doubt the founders would have considered them a reasonable 'well regulated' arm.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2022 21:52
|
|
|
It's pointless to own a gun to protect yourself from the government because the government that is happy to let your kids die will just brutalize you and have full freedom to do it. Though a government that's chill with that and has gotten everyone to accept that everyone's body is the government's to fill with bullets or allow others to fill with bullets also won't ban guns so the whole discussion is very silly and primarily just depressing. Don't own guns, everyone who wants to brutalize you will just outgun you and if you own a gun they'll probably make you do miserable you'll kill yourself with it before shooting back. But also if you own one who gives a gently caress, you live in a country who has decided personal safety is a you problem and not a societal one and it's no ones responsibility to help if you're in danger.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2022 21:53
|
|
|
Anyone arguing that a civilian assault rifle is a useful tool against the American government, in any form, has absolutely no idea what they are talking about. Such a viewpoint purposefully ignores the dozens of incidents proving otherwise. I understand the mentality of "everyone else has them so I might as well have one to protect myself". That's rational. What's not rational is thinking a lovely AR15 is a check against the power of the government. It's not. It can protect you against an intruder (as unlikely as that may be). It can't protect you against an infantry squad, an armored vehicle, a SWAT team, or a drone-fired missile.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2022 21:58
|
|
|
kzin602 posted:Those rights were pinned while under occupation on one side and wilderness on the other, they were making a statement of defiance against the British army by stating that people can have arms and even organize a 'well regulated' milita in the interest of community defence. It makes sense in the context of also forbidding soldiers from forcing themselves into a home to use for shelter. I expect many would have been fine with individuals having a private armored calvary regiment if everyone was still keeping things civil. I don't care what they would have wanted, but i don't think private armies were as anathema as one would have hoped. Their general theory seems to have been that the vast distances would ensure regional differences would offset and prevent the worst excesses of power and that's just nit right anymore.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2022 22:01
|
|
|
Timeless Appeal posted:The 2nd Amendment was drafted in a different technological context, with a completely different conception of how the US would defend itself,[ and it consistently failed to actually protect marginalized people defending themselves against the government. Unsurprisingly, mandatory militias fared much better in the South due to apprehending fugitive slaves and putting down the occasional slave revolt. Edit: For a source on the aforementioned meeting, A Documentary History of American Industrial Society Vol. V, pp. 157-164. Enver Zogha fucked around with this message at 22:08 on May 26, 2022 |
|
#
?
May 26, 2022 22:01
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/Tom_Winter/status/1529524085759385600 Ok, the cops definitely shot a bunch of kids themselves
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2022 22:03
|
|
|
It looks like in a number of cases the right is going down a path of legally empowering fascist vigilantes to hurt people in ways they haven't managed to do yet through direct legislation, so, yknow, that might be worth factoring into the conversation.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2022 22:03
|
|
|
Also the one thing that doesn't get brought up enough in discussions on the 2nd Amendment is that the US government at that time shared a hostile frontier with hundreds of Native tribes (that were hostile out of justified self preservation) and no fewer than 5 major colonial European powers. An armed citizenry was arguably necessary then because North America didn't have any real borders- it was still a fevered land grab.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2022 22:04
|
|
|
Enver Zogha posted:One funny thing is that already in the early 1800s mandatory militia training became increasingly unpopular in Northern states due to it being seen as a waste of time and resources, to the extent that a New York meeting of "Mechanics and other Working Men" in 1829 declared, among other things, "that our present militia system is highly oppressive to the producing classes of the community, without any beneficial result to individuals or the state." Thank you for sharing this. Sincerely.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2022 22:04
|
|
|
Heck Yes! Loam! posted:The feds need to take over the situation in Texas. The cops are just blatantly lying to protect themselves at this point. I’m sure these clowns would make Ferguson look just and competent by comparison. Unfortunately merrick garland hasn’t shown the willingness to do anything.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2022 22:05
|
|
|
Xombie posted:The people who are the ardent defenders of the 2nd amendment throughout history just wanted them so they can shoot black people. This is Native American and indigenous erasure and I will not stand for it.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2022 22:07
|
|
|
I am having immense trouble finding it now, but there’s a great book about black Vietnam vets (I think Vietnam) who came back to a somewhat small southern city and carried out armed, organized resistance against the Klan. You don’t get guns to fight the government, you get them to protect you against those who the government won’t restrain. selec fucked around with this message at 22:12 on May 26, 2022 |
|
#
?
May 26, 2022 22:10
|
|
|
selec posted:I am having immense trouble finding it now, but there’s a great book about black Vietnam vets (I think Vietnam) who came back to a somewhat small southern city and carried out armed, organized resistance against the Klan. Unless of course those are also the government. Those that burn crosses etc etc
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2022 22:12
|
|
|
Lemming posted:https://twitter.com/Tom_Winter/status/1529524085759385600
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2022 22:13
|
|
|
Lemming posted:https://twitter.com/Tom_Winter/status/1529524085759385600 Explains why they waited. They wanted to make sure all the kids either escaped or were killed first so they could comfortably rely on their age old tactic of firing indiscriminately. I wouldn't be surprised if they killed a few kids or teachers though because accountability is for the little people and not those in positions of authority. 
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2022 22:13
|
|
|
Oracle posted:Unless of course those are also the government. Those that burn crosses etc etc Sounds like a them problem, can’t see a badge through the robe.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2022 22:16
|
|
|
FLIPADELPHIA posted:Anyone arguing that a civilian assault rifle is a useful tool against the American government, in any form, has absolutely no idea what they are talking about. Such a viewpoint purposefully ignores the dozens of incidents proving otherwise. Again, why not attack the situation from the right then? Calls for gun control clearly have fallen on deaf ears. Have the NRA and GPO twist themselves in knots on why one should own a gun but not a drone. Rights are rights and freedom is freedom after all. Attacking things from a logical view one does not share with you is silly. Follow their logic to the proper conclusion.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2022 22:20
|
|
|
selec posted:Sounds like a them problem, can’t see a badge through the robe. Sounds like a you problem when every cop in the country is out for your blood once the badge is revealed.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2022 22:20
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 01:10 |
|
|
Oracle posted:Sounds like a you problem when every cop in the country is out for your blood once the badge is revealed. If a cop winds up dead in a klan robe something tells me there’s going to be some hubbub, especially if the killer is unknown. Plenty of civil rights workers had guns. Imagining reasons why they shouldn’t seems counterfactual when there are cases of those guns being used to protect themselves.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2022 22:23
|
|