this post was submitted on 25 Jun 2024
967 points (93.2% liked)

Lemmy Shitpost

26245 readers
4012 users here now

Welcome to Lemmy Shitpost. Here you can shitpost to your hearts content.

Anything and everything goes. Memes, Jokes, Vents and Banter. Though we still have to comply with lemmy.world instance rules. So behave!


Rules:

1. Be Respectful


Refrain from using harmful language pertaining to a protected characteristic: e.g. race, gender, sexuality, disability or religion.

Refrain from being argumentative when responding or commenting to posts/replies. Personal attacks are not welcome here.

...


2. No Illegal Content


Content that violates the law. Any post/comment found to be in breach of common law will be removed and given to the authorities if required.

That means:

-No promoting violence/threats against any individuals

-No CSA content or Revenge Porn

-No sharing private/personal information (Doxxing)

...


3. No Spam


Posting the same post, no matter the intent is against the rules.

-If you have posted content, please refrain from re-posting said content within this community.

-Do not spam posts with intent to harass, annoy, bully, advertise, scam or harm this community.

-No posting Scams/Advertisements/Phishing Links/IP Grabbers

-No Bots, Bots will be banned from the community.

...


4. No Porn/ExplicitContent


-Do not post explicit content. Lemmy.World is not the instance for NSFW content.

-Do not post Gore or Shock Content.

...


5. No Enciting Harassment,Brigading, Doxxing or Witch Hunts


-Do not Brigade other Communities

-No calls to action against other communities/users within Lemmy or outside of Lemmy.

-No Witch Hunts against users/communities.

-No content that harasses members within or outside of the community.

...


6. NSFW should be behind NSFW tags.


-Content that is NSFW should be behind NSFW tags.

-Content that might be distressing should be kept behind NSFW tags.

...

If you see content that is a breach of the rules, please flag and report the comment and a moderator will take action where they can.


Also check out:

Partnered Communities:

1.Memes

2.Lemmy Review

3.Mildly Infuriating

4.Lemmy Be Wholesome

5.No Stupid Questions

6.You Should Know

7.Comedy Heaven

8.Credible Defense

9.Ten Forward

10.LinuxMemes (Linux themed memes)


Reach out to

All communities included on the sidebar are to be made in compliance with the instance rules. Striker

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] shalafi@lemmy.world 20 points 2 months ago (3 children)

Then I ask this: School shootings simply never happened when I was a kid in the 70's and 80's. We had far less regulation*. Any asshole could buy a gun, get it delivered to their doorstep, and they were cheap. Yes, even AR-15s.

This shit all started with Columbine. Want to suicide and go out the most horrific way possible? Shoot up a school!

So no, it's not the guns. Nothing has really changed on that front. So what happened?

* One exception: Conceal carry laws were nothing like today, far more restrictive. I'm leaving that out because criminals and mass murderers hardly give a shit about carrying illegally. Would that stop you if you were intent on murder? Also, at the same time, the laws around transporting guns generally became more restrictive.

[–] uberdroog@lemmy.world 21 points 2 months ago

I feel 9/11 and faux news had something to do with fetishizing guns. Fear mongering kills.

[–] Liz@midwest.social 13 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Yeah, it's a social problem. Recognize that mass shooters are almost exclusively white males. The book Angry White Men by Michael Kimmel does a great job of profiling the person who does this sort of thing and why. There's a lot that goes into it. Economics, masculinity, school culture, etc.

[–] PhlubbaDubba@lemm.ee 11 points 2 months ago (2 children)

Weren't the 70s and 80s the peak of violent crime in the US? Including armed violent crime?

[–] GiveMemes@jlai.lu 7 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

Violent crime has pretty consistently dropped for the past century in the US with a small blip in the 90s often attributed to the prevalence of leaded gasoline and the higher propensity for violence that people exposed to it often had.

School shootings still weren't a big/common thing back then tho so I fail to see your point.

[–] PhlubbaDubba@lemm.ee 2 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

The point is that an all time peak in violent crime and violent gun crime would indicate you're not disproving gun crime you're just hiding it in dark numbers that you're hoping we won't think matter.

Also that peak is statistically referred to as happening between the 70s and 90s, specifically quadrupling vs rates prior in the 60s and 50s, before declining afterwards, so you were kinda right.

https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistory/comments/1b3jm3x/why_was_there_more_crime_in_the_us_in_1970s1980s/

[–] GiveMemes@jlai.lu 8 points 2 months ago

Sorry what context were we talking about? Oh yeah, school shootings. Also that's still the point; it being a clear relationship. I don't understand what your point is. You posed a whataboutism. They're two different arguments.

If you want to talk about gun crime and reform broadly we can. First, in the case of things like mental health checks, how do we decide what makes someone fit to get a firearm? How do we decide who gets to make that decision? How are we going to regulate firearm sales? How do we make it possible for private sales to exist while enforcing background checks and without causing undue burden. Btw you know you already need to get a backhround check to get a firearm except in a few circumstances, right?The American pseudo-left is often frothing at the mouth for reform on this issue and has poorly formed (if any) ideas about what should actually go into place. It doesn't help that most people are controlled by fear mongering more effectively than facts, especially those that don't know much about guns.

Another pr9blem people have with gun control regulation is that it allows an authoritarian government to more easily defeat the populace. In every modern war, guerrillas, especially in urban areas, have the upper hand against modern militaries due to the need to project soft power and retain international support. If you think it's never gonna happen here then you clearly haven't been paying attention and if you're gonna be one of those people that goes "bubut the military had bombs and jets" don't even bother replying as you clearly haven't been paying attention modern history and the successes across the world of resistance movements.

And it's all great to say that the 20,000 people a year that die from guns (mostly suicide followed by active gang members engaged in gang violence, both activities prone to causing deaths regardless of accessibility to guns, but likely reduced) are a price that's worth it to pay but there's no realistic way that you're disarming the American populace, only preventing new sales. This means that there will still be a huge amount of guns available for criminals, and as we've seen with drugs, banning something that people desire just causes a crime-ridden black market. Not to mention the immeasurable good that they could do against a tyrannical government.

On top of that, you can literally 3d print firearms now. It at least used to take some knowhow but now any scmuck can get into it with just a little bit of searching and a very minor investment. In that way, the cat's out of the bag, and if the US gun market fails to supply criminals, especially organized crime, we know exactly what they're going to do.

The key is building up social services in impoverished areas and removing the factors that push people towards crime. Improving our mental health infrastructure and social safety nets such that we have a violent crime rate that resembles other developed nations. Reducing the needless/baseless criminalization and overpolicing of poor and minority communities to reduce the trauma of communities growing up without fathers. Getting a handle on race relations, even between different poc groups, such that gangs become an unnecessary method of association. Not just zeroing in on the scary but useful tool that is the firearm, especially as it is the only true equalizer in society. "God created man but Samuel Colt made them equal".

Not to mention how they allow women especially to stand up to violence they would otherwise have no chance against. Don't give me the pepper spray and stun gun bs btw, I pity the person that thinks that will stop a large, angry man. If you're truly interested in nonlethal means of self defense however, I believe the foaming/gel bear sprays would definitely stop an attacker, but they tend to be quite large and annoying to carry. Also, if you think armed self defense is unnecessary it's only because you've never been in a situation where you wanted or tried to defend yourself but couldn't. I don't carry a weapon, but I've experienced things that make me feel like maybe I should've been and things would've gone differently.

Sorry for the long flow of consciousness style comment and I apologize if I attacked you at all I can sometimes get heated abt this subject.

School shootings are a miniscule issue though by the statistics. The problem is that we spectalize them with the 24 hour news cycle because it makes people angry and upset. This spectacle is also exactly the reward these murderers are seeking out. If the news was required to spend a proportionate amount of time on different subjects by how much they negatively impact your health on average (let's say by how much they reduce the life expectancy of the average person), we should be banning cigarettes, alcohol, and added sugars long before guns. Why are we so focused on the guns? Why aren't we focusing on reducing our ridiculous overweight and obesity rates? Because school shootings make you sad, like the WWF panda or the aspca commercial. Don't get me wrong, they get me sad too, but our deeply damaged society is to blame, not guns.

[–] GBU_28@lemm.ee 6 points 2 months ago (1 children)

In general yes but this discussion is a out mass shootings.

[–] PhlubbaDubba@lemm.ee 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

This discussion is about gun violence. Saying there weren't a lot of school shootings back then is about as helpful to the root issue discussion as saying that cyberbullying wasn't an issue before the 90s anyways.

[–] GBU_28@lemm.ee 5 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

Almost all comments in this chain, and indeed the immediate one you replied to mention "school shooting".

Beyond that, schools and dangerous guns existed before 1980.

Edit even the original meme is about a school shooting

[–] PhlubbaDubba@lemm.ee -5 points 2 months ago (1 children)

School shootings aren't a part of gun violence?

[–] GBU_28@lemm.ee 4 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Of course they are, but to suggest the same variables drive a school shooting vs a midnight gas station robbery is silly

[–] PhlubbaDubba@lemm.ee -4 points 2 months ago (1 children)
[–] Anyolduser@lemmynsfw.com 5 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Because they're different crimes with different motives committed by different people under different circumstances.

Literally the only things in common between the two are firearms, humans being involved, and them both taking place on the planet Earth.

[–] PhlubbaDubba@lemm.ee -4 points 2 months ago (1 children)

What makes those people different?

[–] Anyolduser@lemmynsfw.com 4 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Well, serves me right for feeding the troll.

[–] PhlubbaDubba@lemm.ee -1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

No really, what makes them different, what's the obvious difference between the kind of person you picture robbing a store and the kind you picture committing a mass shooting?

Be bold, tell everyone the difference. Explain to us this essential difference that makes it so important that we segregate mass shootings from all other forms of gun violence as somehow a special sort of case?

[–] GBU_28@lemm.ee 0 points 2 months ago (1 children)

What are you on about? The motivations and end goals of an armed robbery and mass shooting are obviously and clearly different.

To help you:

A robbery tries to acquire things, and the gun is a threat they generally hope to not use (but might be pretty comfortable using).

A mass shooting is a terroristic event with the core goal of killing as many as possible.

A thief isn't necessarily interested in killing. A mass shooter is.

Simple stuff.

[–] PhlubbaDubba@lemm.ee 0 points 2 months ago (1 children)

If you pull a gun out you are not threatening, you have declared your intent to kill whatever it's pointing at.

It is not a defense tool, it is a "all other options are expired and now someone has to die" tool.

There is no motive for pointing your gun at someone except to shoot them.

No matter how much your dumbass might think you're just trynna scare them a bit.

It is the same. It is gun violence. It is terrorism without a cause.

[–] GBU_28@lemm.ee 0 points 2 months ago (1 children)

I'm aware of the basics of gun safety, and aware that having a gun elevates the charges on a crime like a robbery. Pointing a gun at anything does indeed make clear your willingness to kill.

But you dodged the point of my reply, the motive or intent of the crime.

A robbery is not terrorism, or terroristic in motive. A robbery has a cause and a goal outside of killing. I'm not saying an armed robbery isn't an inherently violent act, and I never said that shit about "trynna scare them". Not sure where you gathered that.

You've devolved to name calling, inserting thoughts for others, and dodging the point of what you're replying to. Seems you're about spent

[–] PhlubbaDubba@lemm.ee 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

My point is that involving the gun makes it terrorism by the same principle of escalation.

It's not a robery, it's a near death experience where money might change hands.

Gun violence is gun violence. It is all attempted murder and terrorism. Fact that some people want money out of it is irrelevant, it is still terrorism.

[–] GBU_28@lemm.ee 1 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Words have definitions. Real life has different situations. Those situations have different motives and results, even if they share features. Edit you can't just declare everything violent terroristic.

It's silly to assume that the same actions would have the same impacts on two very different types of crime, despite both of those crimes having a gun.

For example: red flag laws where family or certain professionals can bring forward action to take guns away from someone or get them certain care. This is triggered by said folks detecting or acknowledging certain concerning behaviors in someone who might carry out a mass shooting.

This wouldn't help with someone considering a robbery, as their pattern of behavior (edit and motivation) isn't the same.

I am not advocating for red flag laws, or discounting them. That's not the point.