|
Squalid posted:if you look at my post history itt you can see I'm basically just saying that over and over but "mass shootings aren't statistically significant" doesn't mean that, it doesn't mean anything. I'm not sure the guy who posted it even knows what a statistic is. To answer this specific question: "do you think the effects of dispersed violence don't extend past the physical victims?" - No, I think that the effects of dispersed violence do extend past the physical victims. I disagree with the notion that "[m]rear end shootings and individual shoots are ultimately different manifestations of the same problem" unless you abstract the root "problem" away to a point that it's nearly meaningless. There are certainly important similarities and connections (for example, the fact that a gun was used), but we shouldn't be trying to find a single solution to both problems, nor should we decide that one shouldn't be addressed based on an over simplified comparison (the number of people shot). If we can do something to reduce the frequency or deadliness of mass shootings, we should do it, even if it doesn't address other types of gun violence. We should also try to do something about the other kinds of violence at the same time.
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2019 20:03
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 3, 2024 00:56 |
|
|
The fundamental problem is violence. The reason any shooting is bad, mass or otherwise, is because it is a homicide and assault. It doesn't take much abstraction to realize suicide is a related form of violence, even if it is directed at the self. As connected phenomena, a policy that ameliorates one kind of violence can also reduce other kinds, especially if it is well designed. For example the article I posted earlier about red flag laws goes into the psychological relationship between suicide and mass shootings, and finds that policies designed to remove guns from the hands of people at risk of mass shootings also reduce suicides. This should be kept in mind when designing policies, since a good policy should be able to reduce mass shooting deaths and other kinds of violent death at the same time. Since our goal is reducing violent death, the best policies are those which reduce it the most. A policy that reduces gun prevalence is likely to save the most lives through reducing suicide, but it could plausibly also reduce mass shooting and other kinds of homicide deaths as well. So such policies are worth championing above something with lower potential impact and high costs like mandating greater security at schools or public functions.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2019 21:40
|
|
|
I unironically think we'll need to incorporate the lessons of nations that have disarmed after civil wars. Partly because of the vast amount of unaccounted-for firearms in the country. E.g. 'Disarmament and Demobilisation After Civil Wars: Arms, Soldiers and the Termination of Armed Conflicts', Edited twice for preview not being post. Doh! RandomPauI fucked around with this message at 13:56 on Sep 25, 2019 |
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2019 13:54
|
|
|
Squalid posted:The fundamental problem is violence. The reason any shooting is bad, mass or otherwise, is because it is a homicide and assault. It doesn't take much abstraction to realize suicide is a related form of violence, even if it is directed at the self. I don't disagree with you on a general level - we should be absolutely be trying to address the root causes of violence, but if you're arguing that we should only address the root causes and not also try to reduce the effects of or damage caused by particular forms of violence, I can't agree with that. Which is not me saying that we should do anything at all, just that we should do things that are effective, even if they don't help in every case.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2019 14:05
|
|
|
We're basically trapped in a place where there is a plethora of options and directions to tackle America's gun problems from, and none of them are being taken.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2019 15:03
|
|
|
SlothfulCobra posted:We're basically trapped in a place where there is a plethora of options and directions to tackle America's gun problems from, and none of them are being taken.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2019 15:05
|
|
|
captainblastum posted:I don't disagree with you on a general level - we should be absolutely be trying to address the root causes of violence, but if you're arguing that we should only address the root causes and not also try to reduce the effects of or damage caused by particular forms of violence, I can't agree with that. Well I would say the red flag laws are definitely addressing a symptom rather than cause. I just think it is important to emphasize the fundamental issues, and not to get distracted fighting over superficial details. What we don't want is get a bunch of energy and activism and waste it fighting for policy which won't actually make any difference or is actively harmful. In the eighties and nineties people were right to be concerned about rising crime -- but the "solution" people settled on -- a massive increase in punitive incarceration -- did not actually solve the problems. Instead it just created massive new issues with which we are still grappling.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2019 19:20
|
|
|
suck my woke dick posted:otoh policy should follow statistics more than public outrage
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2019 01:25
|
|
|
ARs are boring Lego guns anyway. AKs for everyone IMO. A proper socialist rifle for the twenty-first century.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2019 05:09
|
|
|
Rent-A-Cop posted:ARs are boring Lego guns anyway. AKs for everyone IMO. Eh, the AK is too susceptible to jamming due to mud and dust. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9APzYqwXckw
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2019 17:25
|
|
|
I had a couple thoughts is USPOL but then saw this.fool of sound posted:Ok if we're now in full on "what about civil war?" mode then I think the gunchat has probs run its course for now. Sounds like a reminder to take this where it belongs. So, first, how many Nazis showed up yesterday in VA? And, second, a question for leftist full gun-unism now posters: how do you reconcile with the fact that if it were voted on by everyone who’s not a white male, we’d probably have Australia’s gun laws in the US? (The point I’m making on this latter point is it’s mostly white people and especially white males who are the gun absolutists so I think it gets really dicey for the argument to be that it’s really for the protection of the marginalized. That’s the libertarian argument of course but I’m pretty sure “libertarian as champion of the oppressed” is a tough loving row to hoe in D&D.) yronic heroism fucked around with this message at 05:03 on Jan 22, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2020 04:49
|
|
|
yronic heroism posted:I had a couple thoughts is USPOL but then saw this. 22,000 estimated. White people who aren't chuds can help protect marginalized groups, also I would imagine that people of color are a bit more quiet about their gun ownership since it tends to get them hassled or shot by the police. Leftist full gun-unism is not only about protecting marginalized groups, its about defending yourself from the forces of capital. Check out the history of strike breaking like the Ludlow Massacre.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2020 01:04
|
|
|
Bishyaler posted:22,000 estimated. White people who aren't chuds can help protect marginalized groups, also I would imagine that people of color are a bit more quiet about their gun ownership since it tends to get them hassled or shot by the police. Leftist full gun-unism is not only about protecting marginalized groups, its about defending yourself from the forces of capital. Check out the history of strike breaking like the Ludlow Massacre. But it has never been used for either.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2020 04:22
|
|
|
Jerry Cotton posted:But it has never been used for either. So what you're saying is that Muricans are cowards who are afraid to step even slightly out of line despite having enough ammo in the basement to level half their home town.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2020 05:18
|
|
I CANNOT EJACULATE WITHOUT SEEING NATIVE AMERICANS BRUTALISED!
|
Jerry Cotton posted:But it has never been used for either. I think leftists 4 guns is silly but it actually has though, like when Sau Van Nguyen shot klansman Billy Joe Aplin to death in self-defence and Texas (!!) agreed that yes, that was self-defence. Also see: the entire history of the black panthers and Reagan??
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2020 14:33
|
|
|
Edgar Allen Ho posted:I think leftists 4 guns is silly but it actually has though, like when Sau Van Nguyen shot klansman Billy Joe Aplin to death in self-defence and Texas (!!) agreed that yes, that was self-defence. Were those really about Bishyaler posted:protecting marginalized groups or Bishyaler posted:defending yourself from the forces of capital. ?
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2020 14:38
|
|
|
Jerry Cotton posted:Were those really about yes and yes
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2020 14:41
|
|
|
3D Megadoodoo posted:But it has never been used for either. Matewan yronic heroism posted:I had a couple thoughts is USPOL but then saw this. While I wouldn't support Australia's gun laws either, on just an immediate practical level, that's not what gun control would mean here in the States. Nothing that's on the table, that's even remotely possible, is going to take guns out of the hands of suburban racists, or even make it meaningfully difficult for them to acquire more. On the other hand, guns will be made less accessible for poor people in general, and nationally oppressed communities that already face intense police repression will disproportionately face prohibition, criminalization of possession, and suffer harsher sentences for non-violent or minor crimes. Pomeroy fucked around with this message at 22:42 on Apr 23, 2020 |
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2020 22:31
|
|
|
I have a couple spare guns for libs who are still on that "only our noble and sainted cops and troops should have guns" even after all this, for when it gets so untenable they finally get radicalized. I figure I was a succ lib for decades, we all come around at our own pace, and it's better than an "I told you so."
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2020 06:18
|
|
|
Owlbear Camus posted:I have a couple spare guns for libs who are still on that "only our noble and sainted cops and troops should have guns" even after all this, for when it gets so untenable they finally get radicalized. I figure I was a succ lib for decades, we all come around at our own pace, and it's better than an "I told you so." ill take 10
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2020 06:27
|
|
|
Owlbear Camus posted:I have a couple spare guns for libs who are still on that "only our noble and sainted cops and troops should have guns" even after all this, for when it gets so untenable they finally get radicalized. I figure I was a succ lib for decades, we all come around at our own pace, and it's better than an "I told you so." Yeah that sure is a common liberal ideal. Sure? I’ll buy my own guns. Thanks.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2020 07:32
|
|
|
Owlbear Camus posted:I have a couple spare guns for libs who are still on that "only our noble and sainted cops and troops should have guns" even after all this, for when it gets so untenable they finally get radicalized. I figure I was a succ lib for decades, we all come around at our own pace, and it's better than an "I told you so." What if I want to take guns away from cops?
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2020 08:00
|
|
|
Xiahou Dun posted:Yeah that sure is a common liberal ideal. Sure? It is tho? Either explicitly as in "Those sorts of weapons don't belong in the hands of civilians." "Only police and soldiers should have that type of firearm." Sometimes it's "only soldiers." Or I've found implicitly, by asking if they could enact the policy of their choosing who if anyone would get to keep firearms. Here's a particularly cringe-worthy example of the sentiment in it's natural habitat: https://twitter.com/zaharako/status/1282422761801936896 "Disarm cops and troops, too" or "disarm cops first" or "only disarm cops and arm the homeless" tends to be a plank of more leftward points on the political compass. The Lone Badger posted:What if I want to take guns away from cops? I'd call that a good start.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2020 08:01
|
|
|
Soldiers in a friendly nation tend to have their weapons safely locked up in the armory, so I don't have the same urgency to disarm them as I do cops and private owners. Edit: troops in foreign countries shoot civilians a lot, but I think the answer there is 'stop invading people'. The Lone Badger fucked around with this message at 08:12 on Jul 15, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2020 08:05
|
|
|
The Lone Badger posted:Edit: troops in foreign countries shoot civilians a lot, but I think the answer there is 'stop invading people'. fortunately as the american empire seems to be experiencing a pronounced acceleration of its decline, we simply may lose the ability to soon. unfortunately that may portent some bad news about those hitherto locked up "friendly" armories as the bloody excesses of empire turn inward.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2020 08:16
|
|
|
Owlbear Camus posted:I have a couple spare guns for libs who are still on that "only our noble and sainted cops and troops should have guns" even after all this, for when it gets so untenable they finally get radicalized. I figure I was a succ lib for decades, we all come around at our own pace, and it's better than an "I told you so." Like, are you under the impression that that's a common idea in this thread and you're admitting you didn't read it or just kinda posting to make yourself feel good?
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2020 22:26
|
|
|
I guess I wish that my hobbies gave me the same sort of wildly unwarranted self-assuredness as that guy, but I'm glad that none of my hobbies involve enabling murderers. Also most cops shouldn't have guns.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2020 23:44
|
|
|
I'd take the guns away from the cops before I took them away from the normal people
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2020 01:49
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 3, 2024 00:56 |
|
|
Jaxyon posted:I'd take the guns away from the cops before I took them away from the normal people Priority list; 1) Cops 2) Abnormal people 3) Criminals 4) Normal people 5) People who use them for their job (farmers etc) 6) Soldiers - but only because they're functionally disarmed already n.b. as someone with a diagnosed mental illness I would include myself in #2.
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2020 02:07
|
|