|
Kalit posted:Fewer innocent people would be shot due to negligence/theft. Astonishing levels of liberal brain. “If every goon recycled, it would make a difference” levels of not understanding power and scale. Nothing would change if every goon who owned a gun got rid of it. Nothing at all, there would be no noticeable statistical difference at all. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
#
?
May 29, 2022 04:46
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 18:24 |
|
|
selec posted:Astonishing levels of liberal brain. “If every goon recycled, it would make a difference” levels of not understanding power and scale. If no one had a gun you don't think fewer people would be shot?
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2022 04:52
|
|
|
selec posted:Astonishing levels of liberal brain. “If every goon recycled, it would make a difference” levels of not understanding power and scale. Tell that to the fellow protesters who got shot by Samuel Young E: I misread that as "if every leftist". So I guess I'm technically wrong as far as I know, but my overall point about [presumed] leftists with guns still stands Kalit fucked around with this message at 05:04 on May 29, 2022 |
|
#
?
May 29, 2022 04:53
|
|
|
RBA Starblade posted:If no one had a gun you don't think fewer people would be shot? No no no you see. MORE guns drops deaths because a good guy with a gun Oh yeah I have stars to prove it lemme just- *logs off* (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2022 04:55
|
|
|
selec posted:Astonishing levels of liberal brain. “If every goon recycled, it would make a difference” levels of not understanding power and scale. This is completely missing the point, this is actually a case where your personal decisions do have a large impact on your personal life. The planet will only be negligibly worse (or better, depending on the specific circumstances!) if you recycle, and it won't have any impact on your life at all, beyond the time you spend doing it. Owning a gun, however, has a direct and drastic impact on your life and the life of everyone in your household, significantly raising the chances that someone in the home is shot by a gun. I agree that that individual person will not have a large impact on gun crime or deaths on a societal level, but for that person specifically and those around them, it makes things significantly more dangerous. The situations are not comparable at all. If owning a gun didn't drastically increase the chances of a successful suicide, I would agree that it wouldn't make much of a difference one way or another, but since it does, this is actually a hugely impactful personal decision If every goon who had a gun got rid of it, that pool of goons would have fewer suicides in it
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2022 06:08
|
|
|
Ghost Leviathan posted:Again, if your argument has any supposition that armed leftists are somehow in the way of meaningful gun control laws, you must be high on crack, or frothingly desperate to find excuses to punch left. Anyone who is against meaningful gun control laws is somehow in the way of meaningful gun control laws, even if that way isn't the deciding factor. And there isn't anyone here who isn't left, just start punching and you'll hit that.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2022 06:11
|
|
|
ImpAtom posted:This is not really accurate at all. Guns do not make escaping easier outside of action movies. They are loud, draw attention, and their presence tends to psychologically make people more likely to fight when they don't have to. Hi-larious observation........guns make already brave men and women attack!! Dangerous loud bangs draw our brave blue men and women into battle! are you even kind of serious?
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2022 08:26
|
|
|
Leftist and marginalized group gun ownership often comes with the entirely realistic understanding that, largely, gun laws will not change. That even strict laws can be circumvented more easily than ever and are unlikely to be enforced to a significant degree (against white people). Let's see if the government actually does something and backs it up with enforcement. Then let's see who actually gets targeted. Those saying "it would prevent deaths/guns from falling into the wrong hands" ignore the fact that there is safe use and storage of guns and, because leftists and marginalized groups are often persecuted for having weapons, they often follow the law to a T (and sometimes cops kill them for it). Also, these are not the people doing straw purchases. The worst that can be said is that they are creating demand, but there is no ethical consumption under capitalism and also, look at who they need protection from, what they need protection from, where it's happening and why they feel they need protection, now or in the future. The full context.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2022 10:51
|
|
|
hapsurfer posted:Hi-larious observation........guns make already brave men and women attack!! Dangerous loud bangs draw our brave blue men and women into battle! are you even kind of serious? The logic ImpAtom is using is that if you're in a "we have to flee from the fascist stormtroopers" scenario, your only chance to do it successfully is by stealth. If you get spotted, popping off with a gun will simply draw them down on your head, and if they know that you have a gun, they're likely to simply kill you in a hail of their own gunfire rather than attempt to apprehend you, because it's safer for them.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2022 10:52
|
|
|
PT6A posted:This is ridiculous. It's the Honda Civic of guns in the US because it's available and allowed. It was always a restricted firearm in Canada (making it gently caress-useless for hunting) and now I think it's prohibited, the first of which I agree with based on its characteristics and the second of which I do not, because it was all about optics. It should, like handguns, be a restricted firearm subject to strict controls on ownership, transport, and use. The point is that particular gun itself is not the problem, all guns are. AR15s look like military used M4s so they became the popular, realitively cheap, modifiable rifle. They aren't useful for killing people more than any other semi automatic weapon including most handguns. Less useful in many ways since rifles are at least visible and harder to weild in close quarters. The analogy was correct in banning Honda Civics (which were also popular because of looks, cheapness, and modability) instead of all cars - you're just going after a brand that's popular. Every time you see a politician spouting to ban AR15s but nothing about actual gun measures, you know they're either ignorant or just looking for optics instead of actually doing anything. It's a pointless measure. You need to go after *all* guns.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2022 11:40
|
|
|
Lemming posted:This is completely missing the point, this is actually a case where your personal decisions do have a large impact on your personal life. The planet will only be negligibly worse (or better, depending on the specific circumstances!) if you recycle, and it won't have any impact on your life at all, beyond the time you spend doing it. Owning a gun, however, has a direct and drastic impact on your life and the life of everyone in your household, significantly raising the chances that someone in the home is shot by a gun. This applies to handguns. Rifle and shotgun suicides are very low in comparison (forgot where I saw the stats for it, on my phone so it's hard to look) because it takes a lot more forethought to try to get a perfect angle and pull a trigger with your toe than it is to just put a gun to your head and pull a trigger with your finger.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2022 11:43
|
|
|
Darko posted:This applies to handguns. Rifle and shotgun suicides are very low in comparison (forgot where I saw the stats for it, on my phone so it's hard to look) because it takes a lot more forethought to try to get a perfect angle and pull a trigger with your toe than it is to just put a gun to your head and pull a trigger with your finger. Cobain didn't kill himself 
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2022 11:47
|
|
|
Darko posted:The point is that particular gun itself is not the problem, all guns are. AR15s look like military used M4s so they became the popular, realitively cheap, modifiable rifle. They aren't useful for killing people more than any other semi automatic weapon including most handguns. Less useful in many ways since rifles are at least visible and harder to weild in close quarters. The analogy was correct in banning Honda Civics (which were also popular because of looks, cheapness, and modability) instead of all cars - you're just going after a brand that's popular. You do need to ban at least all semi-automatic weapons since that'd cover handguns apart from revolvers but AR-15s and similar rifles are generally deadlier for these attacks than a handgun would be. I think some of the people calling for an AR-15/assault weapons ban do mean well and are throwing their hands up because after all these attacks our laws keep getting worse instead of better so something is better than nothing. I'm more a since they won't give an inch we should take a mile person though so I wanna say gently caress your guns ban them all. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=edsmI6UCj4w Groovelord Neato fucked around with this message at 12:10 on May 29, 2022 |
|
#
?
May 29, 2022 12:06
|
|
|
Darko posted:The point is that particular gun itself is not the problem, all guns are. AR15s look like military used M4s so they became the popular, realitively cheap, modifiable rifle. They aren't useful for killing people more than any other semi automatic weapon including most handguns. Less useful in many ways since rifles are at least visible and harder to weild in close quarters. The analogy was correct in banning Honda Civics (which were also popular because of looks, cheapness, and modability) instead of all cars - you're just going after a brand that's popular. Aren’t detachable box magazines a big part of why shooters are able to hit ~20 people in a few seconds rather than two or three? Getting rid of the iconic mass-shooting gun also disrupts the script for people who fantasize about doing it just like the famous spree they’re copying (christchurch, columbine, newtown etc). Following a script is a huge part of what shooters are looking to do.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2022 15:42
|
|
|
A unique perspective into the mind of a man who owns a lot of weapons. https://twitter.com/kibblesmith/status/1530916883863638016?s=20&t=-Hb_CFZ4_D2pc0lKdQRbfw EDIT: This is a thread of owners with their collection. Some of these photos made my skin crawl. https://twitter.com/Johnson__joey/status/1530499953944055814?s=20&t=pXaR3EiQS69RLi-UD_WlHg https://twitter.com/Johnson__joey/status/1530499958490660865?s=20&t=pXaR3EiQS69RLi-UD_WlHg https://twitter.com/Johnson__joey/status/1530500030611742721?s=20&t=pXaR3EiQS69RLi-UD_WlHg https://twitter.com/Johnson__joey/status/1530588412964745218?s=20&t=pXaR3EiQS69RLi-UD_WlHg Original source of the photos: https://www.leica-oskar-barnack-award.com/en/shortlists/shortlist-2021/gabriele-galimberti-the-ameriguns.html Dick Trauma fucked around with this message at 18:29 on May 29, 2022 |
|
#
?
May 29, 2022 16:04
|
|
|
Lib and let die posted:Cobain didn't kill himself And Eilliot Smith killed himself by stabbing himself; it doesn't mean that it's how people normally do so. Rifle/shotgun deaths are about as common as other methods of suicide, probably because the barrier to entry is harder because it's pretty convoluted to do so with one as compared to handguns, which are something like 4x the number of deaths or something silly. Handguns are legitimately the biggest gun problem in the U.S. once you consider suicides and domestic homicides/violence. https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMsa1916744 Groovelord Neato posted:You do need to ban at least all semi-automatic weapons since that'd cover handguns apart from revolvers but AR-15s and similar rifles are generally deadlier for these attacks than a handgun would be. I think some of the people calling for an AR-15/assault weapons ban do mean well and are throwing their hands up because after all these attacks our laws keep getting worse instead of better so something is better than nothing. I'm more a since they won't give an inch we should take a mile person though so I wanna say gently caress your guns ban them all. I AM GRANDO posted:Aren’t detachable box magazines a big part of why shooters are able to hit ~20 people in a few seconds rather than two or three? Getting rid of the iconic mass-shooting gun also disrupts the script for people who fantasize about doing it just like the famous spree they’re copying (christchurch, columbine, newtown etc). Following a script is a huge part of what shooters are looking to do. Semi-automatic weapons in general are the problem because you can rapidly change magazines to keep shooting people as opposed to shotguns or single shot rifles. I'd argue that picking specific semi-autos is just a marginal difference that won't really accomplish anything because the shooter will move to the next semi-auto weapon. I've shot a wide range of autos and semi autos at ranges and going from an AR-15 to a M7 isn't making much difference. Take one away and people will just switch to something else. The big issue with rifles over handguns is ammo capacity. This is a huge thing in gun reform that should really be pushed, and something you might be able to change public mentality on. An AR-15 magazine holds 30 rounds which is double the round capacity of a comparable handgun. And you can get extenders up to 100. What the gently caress does someone need 30 rounds at once for outside of laziness in reloading? if you can't ban semi-autos, focus on limiting magazine size while guilting people that need 100 rounds to hit a target for being bad shots to change public mentality. Even for fun, at ranges, I'm trying to bullseye each shot, not spray a bunch of ammo for no reason. And in hunting, if you need 30 rounds to take down a deer, you're a poo poo hunter. edit: Agreed - just beat you VVV Darko fucked around with this message at 16:11 on May 29, 2022 |
|
#
?
May 29, 2022 16:04
|
|
|
Darko posted:Issue is that AR15 = all guns when it comes down to it. AR15s are the same as any other rifle anyone actually uses where it really matters, whether for huntng or whatever. The details barely matter when killing people.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2022 16:08
|
|
|
.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2022 16:56
|
|
|
Darko posted:And Eilliot Smith killed himself by stabbing himself; it doesn't mean that it's how people normally do so. Rifle/shotgun deaths are about as common as other methods of suicide, probably because the barrier to entry is harder because it's pretty convoluted to do so with one as compared to handguns, which are something like 4x the number of deaths or something silly. Handguns are legitimately the biggest gun problem in the U.S. once you consider suicides and domestic homicides/violence. As far as I can tell from reading this, this seems to be partially accounted for by the fact that handgun ownership is much higher than long guns: quote:Second, we only partially accounted for long-gun ownership, although the implications of this are mitigated by the fact that approximately three quarters of suicides by firearm involve handguns12-14 and less than 20% of firearm owners in California own only long guns.53 This seems to suggest that handguns are easier to use for suicide than long guns (which definitely seems to be the case), it's not like long guns aren't being used, and there are a lower percentage of people who only own long guns From this research it also seems to suggest long guns are a factor: https://injepijournal.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s40621-019-0230-y It digs down further in one area to discuss specifically rates of suicide of shotguns separate from rifles, and references some other research that shows different breakdowns that correlate with relative rates of ownerships of the different kinds of guns: quote:These findings were also similar to a small study of Sacramento County, which found that 31% of firearm suicides were by long gun, though they noted that rifles were twice as commonly used as shotguns in that sample. This may reflect increased prevalence of rifles over shotguns in that region, as that study included survey data from the Pacific census division reporting 40% of self-reported firearms were rifles and only 26% shotguns (Wintemute et al. 1998). National surveys conducted by the Pew Research Center also found that while 62% of firearm owners reported that they owned a rifle, only 54% owned a shotgun (Parker et al. 2017). Maryland’s proportion of rifle and shotgun ownership is not known, but future studies may develop local surveys for this purpose and address this unresolved question while exploring alternate reasons for the increased proportions of shotgun suicides. It also discusses how suicides coincide with stuff like hunting seasons: quote:We also found that for rifles, which are the most common weapon used for hunting, the proportion of suicides increased dramatically during deer hunting season. This did not hold true for other firearm types. This seems to further suggest that there isn't something special about handguns specifically, but that the danger is associated with access and how effective the method is, and basically all guns are extremely effective Edit: To sum up I agree that handguns are more of an issue, but that there's also no "one weird trick" to own any kind of gun that won't also be incredibly way more dangerous than not owning it
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2022 17:24
|
|
|
Yeah, reducing ammo capacity is one of those middle grounds that can't necessarily solve the problem but can help if just by slowing down shooters. As we are seeing from the latest horrorfest every moment can save lives.hapsurfer posted:Guns do not make escaping easier outside of action movies. They are loud, draw attention, and their presence tends to psychologically make people more likely to fight when they don't have to. I genuinely have no idea how you are reading what I wrote to get that response.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2022 17:26
|
|
|
This is cool to talk about but I am deeply cynical that there is ever going to be any meaningful gun legislation in this country and, if there is, I imagine things getting ugly. Or uglier. Roughly 1/3 or 1/4 of this country is waiting for that loving day. Wanting it. I don't think it's doable. What does this legislation look like when there's one gun for every person? I think we have a greater chance at UHC or M4A simply because at a certain point we're going to hit critical mass and it will be the only solution. Mass shootings and gun crimes don't negatively effect corporate profits, near as I can tell, and that's the only thing that ever gets anything moving through the halls of government. It's why we don't have UHC right now; because people getting sick is profitable and, what? 20% of our economy? It's weird because even as a college teenager who barely knew poo poo about poo poo I remember having conversations with my more conservative leaning family where we'd talk about what ailed the country and espousing that the biggest threat we face as a nation, or what might possible undo it all, was income disparity, racism and the possibility of a second civil war. Not saying I was a genius (I was quite stupid) but I think I was right about that and, to my eyes, we're getting closer every loving day. We've never really paid the price for national slavery. A bunch of (in this case heavily armed), pissed off poor people with an ax to grind against their government and little left to lose is historically what triggers these things and we're dancing dangerously close up to this edge IMO. I'm just not sure if it's going to be racial in nature or more driven by economics (probably both) but I can promise you that if/when the government ever gets serious about getting guns out of the hands of its citizens, look the gently caress out. What do you think a second 1/6 might look like when these people decide that this time they're coming armed?
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2022 17:30
|
|
|
The correct answer regarding gun control policy is to apply whatever policies can be passed, and use the results to push for further policies. The idea that a given restriction is "meaningless" because it doesn't do enough is a deflective talking point used by the gun industry and its backers to prevent forward movement on gun control. see the "rehtoric of futility" thing I talked about above.
Discendo Vox fucked around with this message at 18:30 on May 29, 2022 |
|
#
?
May 29, 2022 18:24
|
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:The correct answer regarding gun control policy is to apply whatever policies can be passed, and use the results to push for further policies. The idea that a given restriction is "meaningless" because it doesn't do enough is a deflective talking point used by the gun industry and its backers to prevent forward movement on gun control. see the "rehtoric of futility" thing I talked about above. So what's in the pipe? Anyone planning on passing anything? Anyone talking about packing courts?
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2022 18:31
|
|
|
Gumball Gumption posted:So what's in the pipe? Anyone planning on passing anything? Anyone talking about packing courts? Theres a ton of ideas ready to be passed into law. Gotta win elections first. We effectively are outnumbered in the senate 48-52
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2022 18:39
|
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:The correct answer regarding gun control policy is to apply whatever policies can be passed, and use the results to push for further policies. The idea that a given restriction is "meaningless" because it doesn't do enough is a deflective talking point used by the gun industry and its backers to prevent forward movement on gun control. see the "rehtoric of futility" thing I talked about above. That’s the same thinking that led to the 1994 AWB which was the most Pyrrhic victory in the history of American liberalism. It turned what at the time was a niche style of weapon with a small sliver of the market into a totem of American conservatism and the most ubiquitous long gun in the nation. And that’s just the long term, the short term bost it gave to the Republicans in the mid terms the year it was passed and the growth of the single issue gun voter which paid no small part in the 2000 election. Al Gore wins his home state Bush never gets elected no matter what happens in Florida. That doesn’t mean the answer is “do nothin” but grasping at what was at the time considered low hanging fruit got us into this mess to begin with.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2022 18:48
|
|
|
davecrazy posted:That’s the same thinking that led to the 1994 AWB which was the most Pyrrhic victory in the history of American liberalism. It turned what at the time was a niche style of weapon with a small sliver of the market into a totem of American conservatism and the most ubiquitous long gun in the nation. And that’s just the long term, the short term bost it gave to the Republicans in the mid terms the year it was passed and the growth of the single issue gun voter which paid no small part in the 2000 election. Al Gore wins his home state Bush never gets elected no matter what happens in Florida. Y'all both seem right. You have to work the system, as a defensive action if for no other reason. Doing so is insufficient and has proven to be so. Underlying problem here seems to be that the system itself is currently incapable of sufficiently addressing this problem, and gun culture identity one of the main whips that the Republicans have used to get votes so they can't stop using it now without some impulse towards altruism.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2022 18:58
|
|
|
Dick Trauma posted:https://twitter.com/Johnson__joey/status/1530499958490660865?s=20&t=pXaR3EiQS69RLi-UD_WlHg 1) We are only seeing 80% of the collection because the rest are illegal to possess 2) Joel either has kidney failure or is lying about his age
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2022 19:02
|
|
|
Rigel posted:Theres a ton of ideas ready to be passed into law. Gotta win elections first. We effectively are outnumbered in the senate 48-52 the democratic party, as the example of Cuellar demonstrated, will proudly fight to keep themselves effectively outnumbered if the alternative is a progressive in congress, OP.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2022 19:02
|
|
|
That's the roughest 44 I've ever seen, good lord
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2022 19:02
|
|
|
Rigel posted:Theres a ton of ideas ready to be passed into law. Gotta win elections first. We effectively are outnumbered in the senate 48-52 No, we have 50-50 plus the VP, and a party that is unwilling or unable to enforce discipline among its members. They can do things now if they actually want to.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2022 19:11
|
|
|
Rigel posted:Theres a ton of ideas ready to be passed into law. Gotta win elections first. We effectively are outnumbered in the senate 48-52 How many senators need to be elected to implement new gun control laws and codify abortion rights etc? Are the 48 'reliable' senators all publicly committed to ending the filibuster and voting on specific legislation? Or do we need to elect more than 2 new democratic senators this fall in order to accomplish anything, and if so, how many?
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2022 19:19
|
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:The correct answer regarding gun control policy is to apply whatever policies can be passed, and use the results to push for further policies. The idea that a given restriction is "meaningless" because it doesn't do enough is a deflective talking point used by the gun industry and its backers to prevent forward movement on gun control. see the "rehtoric of futility" thing I talked about above. Stupid measures will galvanize the other side and give them ammo to use against other measures. If you ban AR-15s and the next shooters buy SCARs because that's also a cool gun, and the stats don't change - it hurts the banning argument in general because Conservatives will tell the populace that obviously bans don't work. You have to focus ban on things that matter.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2022 19:33
|
|
|
FlamingLiberal posted:That's the roughest 44 I've ever seen, good lord Living in fear of literally everything around you 24/7 will do that to you.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2022 19:33
|
|
|
Gotta love this country sometimes https://twitter.com/billybinion/status/1530968065894146053?s=20&t=sYHk8dQRmJ2rUpujHh6jUA
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2022 19:34
|
|
|
Gumball Gumption posted:So what's in the pipe? Anyone planning on passing anything? Anyone talking about packing courts? Sadly, nothing is going to happen. In another week, this will be off the front page and we'll be back to "normal" until the next one. And by "normal", I mean more schools that look like armed fortresses with a bunch of cops toting guns around like my kid's school has become. Very friendly, welcoming and reeking of a place of learning and education. I'm the only one in this town that finds all that poo poo creepy and already posted that my kid's school wants ME, his mother and his grandfather to do a background check in order to attend whatever it is that passes for his "graduation ceremony". Democrats certainly aren't going to do poo poo and we know what Republicans are about. More guns and armed citizens that somehow tie into their brand of what it means to be a true American Patriot, where all you need to check off the patriot boxes is a bible, a gun, an AM radio station and a loving flag flying either in your yard or your vehicle. Dems will continue to be gravely concerned and wring their hands at being unable to pass anything, admonishing us to vote harder and asking us for money they loving well know we don't have. Wash, rinse, repeat as always. I don't see this an inflection point, sadly. They can gladly come take my 45 if they want it.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2022 19:39
|
|
|
*greenwaldishly* it's an anti-imperialist party now, folks https://twitter.com/davidrkadler/status/1530917084149993474
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2022 19:50
|
|
|
What I find additionally fascinating about gun violence in this country is that after an event like this the right likes to talk about mental health and lone wolf and blah blah and yet nothing ever gets passed that might assist with the mental health angle either. Seriously if we could make mental health resources cheaply available for the entire public it certainly wouldn't solve gun violence but it might have clear political upsides within a generation or so. Which I mean, that's why they won't do it, but I digress. If we want to heal our stupid country we need to do something about health and education. People who say there's no way meaningful gun legislation will pass in the current climate are correct. We have to do something about the way people think first.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2022 19:51
|
|
|
FLIPADELPHIA posted:It's difficult to have this rooted in history because the current US police state can apply deadly force with far greater ease and precision than any example history can provide. When looking at historical examples, they basically fall into three categories: A) a distant, relatively new colonial occupation ruled almost entirely by a puppet govt with military support from the occupier (Vietnam, Afghanistan) B) a nearby, longtime colonial occupation where the occupiers have moved in plenty of their population over the generations to rule directly in what's seen to be an integral part of the empire (Ireland, Algeria) C) the rise of a brutal authoritarian government which uses military force to essentially eradicate political opposition and oppress minorities (Nazi Germany, Soviet Union) These three general groups have big differences in things like the occupiers' political will to continue, the types of targets available to the insurgents, the level of potential public support for the insurgents, and so on. The most relevant to a realistic discussion of American gun rights is probably option B, I think. At least in the levels of violence that would likely be deployed. Low-level repression, with rival militias on the ground fighting alongside or against the state forces. And when it comes to Ireland, it's worth noting that the gun laws there (like in the rest of the UK) were much less permissive than the US, and got stricter over time as the Troubles escalated. The armed IRA groups didn't just roll up to the local gun store to arm up - they engaged in international arms snuggling, buying weapons by the ton from overseas organized crime, arms dealers, and intelligence agencies. As a result, they weren't just rolling around with pistols - aside from plenty of rifles, the Provisional IRA's arms stockpile is known to have included anti-tank rifles, rocket launchers, and surface-to-air missiles. That's in addition to their considerably ability at making their own weapons in-house - they had improvised self-propelled flamethrowers, homemade heavy mortars, improvised armored cars with machinegun turrets, and more. Needless to say, gun control laws didn't have a big impact there! Even essentially banning all guns altogether didn't stop the political violence. Yes, they tried that: in 1972, Northern Ireland issued an order requiring all privately-owned pistols and most rifles to be temporarily turned in to the police for a one-month period. Then the police simply refused to return the weapons afterward, and also refused to issue any new gun licenses.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2022 19:55
|
|
|
Mendrian posted:What I find additionally fascinating about gun violence in this country is that after an event like this the right likes to talk about mental health and lone wolf and blah blah and yet nothing ever gets passed that might assist with the mental health angle either. You have to realize that the conversation being had isn't about solving anything, it's about assigning blame. This is true with just about all American politics
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2022 20:08
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 18:24 |
|
|
Mendrian posted:What I find additionally fascinating about gun violence in this country is that after an event like this the right likes to talk about mental health and lone wolf and blah blah and yet nothing ever gets passed that might assist with the mental health angle either. You do know that a majority of conservatives believe that transgender and gay people are "mentally-ill"? Along with the channer misinformation early on that claimed the shooter was "trans" and "mentally-ill", I know where they're going with when the Republicans start talking about "mental health".
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2022 20:19
|
|
