Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Post
  • Reply
Papercut
Aug 24, 2005

selec posted:

I agree with the statistics, I just don’t think any amount of work short of house-to-house gun raids will achieve what is needed, and still wouldn’t stop mass violence because non of the underlying causes would be fixed.

If every gun in the world disappeared, we’d see people ramming cars into farmer’s markets or other accessible groups of pedestrians.

This isn’t to say wanting to get rid of guns is futile, or dumb; but believing it can be done under the current political order is absurd.

The problem is the system, the guns are a symptom of and accessory to that system. You have to fight a fully integrated vertical, from legislator to manufacturer to consumer, all of whom have had a good fifty years of preparation and planning for this very fight.

Where are all the posters stating they believe getting rid of guns can be done under the current political order?

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Lemming
Apr 21, 2008

selec posted:

If you had to guess which has a shorter, less violent route to success, would it national health care that includes thorough mental health support, or somehow getting back all the handguns?

I don't really understand the question, both are factors, there is no absolute solution or "success" state. More mental health support is needed and less access to guns is needed

Total Party Kill
Aug 25, 2005

Arist posted:

I'm saying suicide is an incredibly impulsive decision most of the time, and you're arguing nonsense out of a refusal to consider that guns may actually be bad in and of themselves.

Yes. This.

I've had bouts of suicidal thoughts and extreme anxiety. But in my home there really isn't any quick, painless ways to just blink my life out of existence in a fraction of a second. If a gun were in my home, maybe I'd have acted on those thoughts.

selec
Sep 6, 2003

Lemming posted:

I don't really understand the question, both are factors, there is no absolute solution or "success" state. More mental health support is needed and less access to guns is needed

I agree, I just think one of these is a much more hardened target (guns) than the other (the business model of health care) and can be much more easily approached. I appreciate the anger and energy directed at gun violence, I think it’s kind of tilting at windmills; America as we know it can’t exist without guns and the threat of violence, but there’s a wedge to change America as we know it from other angles which might loosen up the intransigence of gun policy fights.

Leon Trotsky 2012
Aug 27, 2009

YOU CAN TRUST ME!*


*Israeli Government-affiliated poster
The Texas cops have screwed up enough that the FBI is conducting an investigation separate from the Texas Rangers.

They are still letting the Rangers do their own investigation, but the FBI has taken possession of all the victims' possessions and evidence. The FBI is also developing their own "official" timeline of the shooting.

https://twitter.com/MacFarlaneNews/status/1529912038364958747
https://twitter.com/JoaquinCastrotx/status/1530258932022841346
https://twitter.com/JoaquinCastrotx/status/1530258934573023238

Fritz the Horse
Dec 26, 2019

... of course!
Interesting bit of research on armed security or resource officers in schools https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamanetworkopen/fullarticle/2776515

quote:

A 2021 JAMA Network study conducted by researchers at Hamline University and Metropolitan State University in Minnesota examined a total of 133 school shootings and attempted school shootings from 1980 to 2019.

It was limited by the availability of public data and the inability to measure deterred shootings, among other factors, but researchers found that, controlling for other factors such as location, school type and region, the data showed "armed guards were not associated with significant reduction in rates of injuries" during school mass shootings.

Further, when researchers controlled for location and school characteristic factors, "the rate of deaths was 2.83 times greater (emphasis added) in schools with an armed guard present.

It turns out that having armed staff in schools might actually increase rates of deaths from school shootings. Why? Because someone who is planning a school shooting has already decided their life is over, and many want to suicide by cop rather than be captured and end up in jail.

quote:

The well-documented weapons effect explains that the presence of a weapon increases aggression.6 Whenever firearms are present, there is room for error, and even highly trained officers get split-second decisions wrong. Prior research suggests that many school shooters are actively suicidal, intending to die in the act, so an armed officer may be an incentive rather than a deterrent.4 The majority of shooters who target schools are students of the school, calling into question the effectiveness of hardened security and active shooter drills. Instead, schools must invest in resources to prevent shootings before they occur.

HonorableTB
Dec 22, 2006

Bishyaler posted:

Just because a tool is extremely useful for a task doesn't mean it causes the task to happen. jesus christ.

The only purpose of a gun is to kill. Literally the only purpose. It has no other purpose except to kill whatever it is pointed at. Hunting? You killed that animal. Target shooting? Great shot, you killed the paper target with a headshot. Home defense? You killed the person intruding (or more likely, you just killed your spouse or child. Whoops!). Personal defense at a protest or whatever? You probably just got YOURSELF killed because you're carrying a tool of death in public, and if you didn't get yourself killed then if you have to use it, congrats you probably just killed in "self defense". It all comes down to KILLING. That is what guns ARE FOR.

A car has many other purposes in addition to "use as a battering ram to run over protestors". An axe or knife has other uses like "chopping firewood" and "cutting steak" in addition to chopping people and stabbing people.

A gun's ONLY purpose is to kill. Point blank. You can brandish it as a threat because it is intrinsically understood that the only thing you do with a gun is kill with it. That's WHY brandishing is a threat, and subsequently a crime. I don't know why this has to be explained to you.

HonorableTB fucked around with this message at 20:44 on May 27, 2022

The Sean
Apr 17, 2005

Am I handsome now?


Fritz the Horse posted:

Interesting bit of research on armed security or resource officers in schools https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamanetworkopen/fullarticle/2776515

It turns out that having armed staff in schools might actually increase rates of deaths from school shootings. Why? Because someone who is planning a school shooting has already decided their life is over, and many want to suicide by cop rather than be captured and end up in jail.

Thank you for sharing that.

I was just watching a segment from Hasan Piker where he was talking with one of the Parkland survivors, Cameron Kasky, and he said (paraphrasing) "the SRO was a guy we saw every day and as soon as the shooting started happening I saw the cop run away faster than anyone I've ever seen run before."

A big flaming stink
Apr 26, 2010
Regarding gun control, I think this tweet sums up my position pretty well

https://twitter.com/SanDiegoSRA/status/1529575146817822720?t=J60lAPWe4NM0AGbSEFgp9w&s=19

Especially this follow-up

https://twitter.com/SanDiegoSRA/status/1529633200024084482?t=fdpi2QlmGGtUgQHT3MADaA&s=19

BiggerBoat
Sep 26, 2007

Don't you tell me my business again.

B B posted:

It's also worth noting that Biden's approval ratings are now worse than Trump's at the same point in their presidencies. In fact, at this point in his president, Biden's the least liked of all the presidents for which we have data (going back to 1945):

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/biden-approval-rating/

Jesus.

And if you believe these things tend to be cyclical, as I do, by my math were in the middle of the Carter administration, circa 1978, staring down the barrel of Reagan 2.0 and probably a full 8 years of Republican rule. Only this time whatever the modern version of Reagan and that cabinet might look like is is far more monstrous. And it's chilling me to the loving bone.

CuddleCryptid posted:

I've seen a Thin Green Line flag for sanitation workers and honestly it makes more sense than cops because garbage removal actually saves lives.

Agreed. It's an incredibly important job - far more than policing - and people who work at it get made fun of because ha ha you're a garbage man. I lived in Philly during a garbage strike and it was loving disgusting.

BiggerBoat fucked around with this message at 20:50 on May 27, 2022

Nonsense
Jan 26, 2007

There are plenty of countries who can be called in to mop up leftist militias, if America actually croaked. Just give up the guns.

Yeowch!!! My Balls!!!
May 31, 2006

Bishyaler posted:

Just because a tool is extremely useful for a task doesn't mean it causes the task to happen. jesus christ.

as an object example of how wrong-footed this line of thinking is, probating you will result in an immediate and dramatic drop in the number of posts you make

suitably determined posters will still post, of course, but the overwhelming majority of posters are stopped for the duration by this act of sensible regulation

A big flaming stink
Apr 26, 2010
Gun violence is a real and traumatic problem in this country, but I do not believe the government is capable of implementing reform that will not be asymmetrically applied to the most oppressed

For the record, I have no illusions about the ability of civilians to resist the power of the state with small arms alone. The power of the working class is to paralyze the functions of the state through collective withdrawal of our labor, and in that scenario guns play a role of protection against reactionary violence

Willa Rogers
Mar 11, 2005

Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:

The Texas cops have screwed up enough that the FBI is conducting an investigation separate from the Texas Rangers.

Cool, at least the time's getting shorter between Biden or his spokespeople saying something idiotic like this

https://twitter.com/dcexaminer/status/1529938825077833742

and their walking it back & reversing course.

BonoMan
Feb 20, 2002

Jade Ear Joe

Boy that is a big ole pile of "not saying poo poo."

Lib and let die
Aug 26, 2004

A big flaming stink posted:

Gun violence is a real and traumatic problem in this country, but I do not believe the government is capable of implementing reform that will not be asymmetrically applied to the most oppressed

For the record, I have no illusions about the ability of civilians to resist the power of the state with small arms alone. The power of the working class is to paralyze the functions of the state through collective withdrawal of our labor, and in that scenario guns play a role of protection against reactionary violence

yeah, they're not gonna clean out the suburbs first. mark and patty mccolskey are going to be the last ones to have their guns taken from them while the poorest, most vulnerable people whose lives are actively put at risk during every police encounter whether they themselves are armed or not will be stripped of the only protection against a killer cop they have first.

A big flaming stink
Apr 26, 2010

Willa Rogers posted:


and their walking it back & reversing course.

this happens with pretty much everything Biden says off the cuff. whatever the actual policy of the administration is, bidens statements have a tangential relation to it at absolute best

BonoMan posted:

Boy that is a big ole pile of "not saying poo poo."

do you mind elaborating on why you believe this to be the case?

A big flaming stink fucked around with this message at 20:57 on May 27, 2022

BiggerBoat
Sep 26, 2007

Don't you tell me my business again.

VideoGameVet posted:

Who said "It's the economy, stupid."

Oh yeah, Bill Clinton.

And he was right. And this will insure a massive GOP sweep in the fall.

So what I don't understand, using gasoline prices as an example, if the companies are enjoying record profits WHERE IS THE DOJ? why isn't there a investigation into price fixing etc?

I was told repeatedly no less than 3 or 4 months ago in this very thread that the economy, by any traditional measure, was absolutely booming. My argument at the time was that those measurements weren't meaningful because the don't positively impact most Americans. I haven't felt that "the economy" has been healthy for a good long loving while.

ImpAtom
May 24, 2007

HonorableTB posted:

The only purpose of a gun is to kill. Literally the only purpose. It has no other purpose except to kill whatever it is pointed at.

A car has many other purposes in addition to "use as a battering ram to run over protestors". An axe or knife has other uses like "chopping firewood" and "cutting steak" in addition to chopping people and stabbing people.

A gun's ONLY purpose is to kill. Point blank. You can brandish it as a threat because it is intrinsically understood that the only thing you do with a gun is kill with it. That's WHY brandishing is a threat, and subsequently a crime. I don't know why this has to be explained to you.

More to the point it being a tool to kill does not actually make it the best tool for that purpose.

Guns as a form of self defense have a *lot* of disadvantages that a spree shooter doesn't have.

First and foremost that firing accurately in a crazy situation is nearly impossible even for trained soldiers. Guns are hard to use which is why guns trend towards 'fire many many shots.' You are not going to be John Wick.

Second is that it adds confusion. If gunfire is going on you won't have perfect knowledge of who the actual danger is. If you have a gun someone else might think you are the shooter or with the shooter or likewise you could shoot the wrong person.

Third is *bullets go somewhere.* If someone is trying a spree killing they don't care if they miss and kill someone by accident. You' presumably do. Firing during a panic is a great way to murder people by accident. This is *why* we even need to do consider that some of the children could have died to friendly fire. Bullets go somewhere

Four is that you are inarguably not as well armed as a spree shooter and your death just gives them another weapon.

And it goes on. A gun may be *able* to stop a spree shooter but it can also very easily make things much worse. Frankly tackling the fucker is probably a better option.

Heck Yes! Loam!
Nov 15, 2004

a rich, friable soil containing a relatively equal mixture of sand and silt and a somewhat smaller proportion of clay.
More ways the cops hosed up

https://twitter.com/PatrickSvitek/status/1530221971174309893

Lib and let die
Aug 26, 2004


Maybe he was busy looking out for Predator. He's not totally invisible, the tell-tale shimmer gives him away. With no immediately visible suspect it's a reasonable conclusion to come to that you might be hunting The apex hunter.

Dick Trauma
Nov 30, 2007

God damn it, you've got to be kind.
https://twitter.com/davidhogg111/status/1530252617296891906?s=20&t=Ju8AuUKA_WxsnevhS3wRTg

https://twitter.com/AdamParkhomenko/status/1530253022881792000?s=20&t=Ju8AuUKA_WxsnevhS3wRTg

Dick Trauma fucked around with this message at 21:05 on May 27, 2022

Papercut
Aug 24, 2005

Lib and let die posted:

yeah, they're not gonna clean out the suburbs first. mark and patty mccolskey are going to be the last ones to have their guns taken from them while the poorest, most vulnerable people whose lives are actively put at risk during every police encounter whether they themselves are armed or not will be stripped of the only protection against a killer cop they have first.

Is there evidence that guns are "protection" against killer cops for vulnerable people?

CommieGIR
Aug 22, 2006

The blue glow is a feature, not a bug


Pillbug

Yeah its absolutely astounding that both the NRA and Abbott thinking continuing the NRA convention is a good look.

BlueBlazer
Apr 1, 2010

The difference with the SRA and NRA is a community of responsibility. Right-wing gun folk are isolated and actively resist community involvement. So called self-defense and castle doctrine only provide the means to protect your own property, an inherent capitalist stance. Out sourcing community protection to the police, most of whom don't even reside in the community they are tasked to "protect( the property of the rich)", is a sham.

The modern right-wing ideology on gun worship is hypocritically disconnected from the original intent of the second amendment. All the way through.

I would say that some sort of focus on having a "well regulated militia" might solve both the lack of competent policing and isolated gun ownership, but its America, in most places it will turn into bigoted posses harassing minorities.

The SRA is good. Making gun ownership community centric rather than self-centric is a goal I think alot of folk can get behind.

Gumball Gumption
Jan 7, 2012

A big flaming stink posted:

Gun violence is a real and traumatic problem in this country, but I do not believe the government is capable of implementing reform that will not be asymmetrically applied to the most oppressed

For the record, I have no illusions about the ability of civilians to resist the power of the state with small arms alone. The power of the working class is to paralyze the functions of the state through collective withdrawal of our labor, and in that scenario guns play a role of protection against reactionary violence

I don't think gun laws, though I agree I don't think they will be implemented at all and if they are it won't be unilateral disarmament, would really have an impact on a leftist movement to arm itself. It's not going to be a ragtag group of heroes with guns coming together. It will be through organized groups who would make efforts to arm themselves either legal or not. The 3D printed gun is a reality at this point.

HonorableTB
Dec 22, 2006
Seattle had 88 fatal shootings last year and 372 people wounded by gunfire in the one of the bluest cities in one of the bluest states that also has some of the strongest local and state gun restrictions in place nationwide. I don't know if those numbers are better used in comparison to places without such gun restrictions to show how relatively fewer people get shot here vs elsewhere, or to use them as evidence that even these restrictions aren't good enough and more should be done.

Personally I think it should be both. There aren't any gun shops in the city limits, or ammo shops afaik. I'm unsure if you can still get guns at pawn shops, but probably so. I don't normally go to pawn shops but in GA I was able to buy a Mosin Nagant about 12 years back so it's not shocking. But guns here are rather difficult to get compared to elsewhere. No Walmarts in the city limits to sell shotguns, for example.

https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/592130-seattle-area-sees-record-gun-violence-in-2021/

HonorableTB fucked around with this message at 21:23 on May 27, 2022

B B
Dec 1, 2005

Greg Abbott just gave his speech at the NRA. Notable is that he praised the bravery of the teachers and staff but didn't even mention the police.

Willa Rogers
Mar 11, 2005

I thought Abbott wasn't going to attend the NRA convention?

Leon Trotsky 2012
Aug 27, 2009

YOU CAN TRUST ME!*


*Israeli Government-affiliated poster

Willa Rogers posted:

I thought Abbott wasn't going to attend the NRA convention?

He submitted a video statement and they played it.

B B
Dec 1, 2005

Uvalde is also calling in police from elsewhere to protect their cops:

https://twitter.com/CBSDFW/status/1530222513887883265

Dick Trauma
Nov 30, 2007

God damn it, you've got to be kind.

B B posted:

Uvalde is also calling in police from elsewhere to protect their cops:

https://twitter.com/CBSDFW/status/1530222513887883265

Never underestimate your average police officer's hunger for overtime. Back when I was a dispatcher there would be fights over the assignments. The billable hours for just this incident are going to be tremendous. I cannot imagine the expense nation wide.

Kalit
Nov 6, 2006

The great thing about the thousands of slaughtered Palestinian children is that they can't pull away when you fondle them or sniff their hair.

That's a Biden success story.

I honestly can't tell the difference between this and a right-wing twitter account. It literally sounds like a Fox News correspondent if you replace right wing gun owners with left wing gun owners. They both complain of "my rights" and sound desperate for violence while pretending to be sympathetic towards the (yet another) massacre

BiggerBoat
Sep 26, 2007

Don't you tell me my business again.

I AM GRANDO posted:

I don’t think the problem can be that there aren’t enough guns in the US or that there are people who aren’t able to get guns easily enough.

Yeah, I keep thinking and telling people that this nation has a lot of shortages of things and short comings in general but a lack of firearms is certainly not one of them.

But we will never ever get rid of them. I'm all for it but see no practical way to implement it. That ship has sailed and the genie is well out of the loving bottle.

Papercut
Aug 24, 2005

Kalit posted:

I honestly can't tell the difference between this and a right-wing twitter account. It literally sounds like a Fox News correspondent if you replace right wing gun owners with left wing gun owners. They both complain of "my rights" and sound desperate for violence while pretending to be sympathetic towards the (yet another) massacre

It's literally Collective Good Guy with a Gun

selec
Sep 6, 2003

Kalit posted:

I honestly can't tell the difference between this and a right-wing twitter account. It literally sounds like a Fox News correspondent if you replace right wing gun owners with left wing gun owners. They both complain of "my rights" and sound desperate for violence while pretending to be sympathetic towards the (yet another) massacre

Last tweet lays it out for you, try it again. That’s the salient point: why do you need guns? If the status quo is working for a liberal, what possible argument is there?

They’re not marginalized, their personal safety isn’t endangered because they’re trans, or black, or gay, or Asian, or a woman, in the way that people not as materially comfortable are.

The most basic of intersectional analysis will get you there: who are you to tell a poor trans person how best to secure their own life?

Meatball
Mar 2, 2003

That's a Spicy Meatball

Pillbug

CommieGIR posted:

Yeah its absolutely astounding that both the NRA and Abbott thinking continuing the NRA convention is a good look.

They don't give a hot gently caress how it looks. They have the courts sewn up and have their vote supression in place. If all that fails, they can just overturn the election, cite some nebulous "fraud" and seat the Republican candidate.

They're way beyond giving a poo poo.

Civilized Fishbot
Apr 3, 2011

selec posted:

The most basic of intersectional analysis will get you there: who are you to tell a poor trans person how best to secure their own life?

Should we not have vaccine mandates because this hypothetical poor trans person wants to secure their own life by avoiding some scary vaccine side effects? It's perfectly appropriate for public policy related to health and safety to be guided by the facts of what makes people healthier or safer, rather than what people believe to make them healthier or safer.

If - as the best available research suggests - gun laws actually do keep people safer, including poor trans people, should we ignore that because we don't want to speak over the voices of people who disagree with that research or feel differently?

Gumball Gumption
Jan 7, 2012

Kalit posted:

I honestly can't tell the difference between this and a right-wing twitter account. It literally sounds like a Fox News correspondent if you replace right wing gun owners with left wing gun owners. They both complain of "my rights" and sound desperate for violence while pretending to be sympathetic towards the (yet another) massacre

They seem pretty far from the home defense horny to blast away a robber right wing arguments. It's specifically arguing that guns are a sad necessity as long as the police are armed. It leaves open the option of a disarmament of American society where we also take the guns away from racist police forces. I'm just not seeing it.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Papercut
Aug 24, 2005

selec posted:

Last tweet lays it out for you, try it again. That’s the salient point: why do you need guns? If the status quo is working for a liberal, what possible argument is there?

They’re not marginalized, their personal safety isn’t endangered because they’re trans, or black, or gay, or Asian, or a woman, in the way that people not as materially comfortable are.

The most basic of intersectional analysis will get you there: who are you to tell a poor trans person how best to secure their own life?

You could use the same argument for a trans anti vaxxer. Their personal beliefs have to be balanced against actual data when it comes to public safety. Is there scientific evidence that guns make the people you're claiming to defend safer?

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply