this post was submitted on 20 Jun 2023
21 points (100.0% liked)
Politics
10179 readers
139 users here now
In-depth political discussion from around the world; if it's a political happening, you can post it here.
Guidelines for submissions:
- Where possible, post the original source of information.
- If there is a paywall, you can use alternative sources or provide an archive.today, 12ft.io, etc. link in the body.
- Do not editorialize titles. Preserve the original title when possible; edits for clarity are fine.
- Do not post ragebait or shock stories. These will be removed.
- Do not post tabloid or blogspam stories. These will be removed.
- Social media should be a source of last resort.
These guidelines will be enforced on a know-it-when-I-see-it basis.
Subcommunities on Beehaw:
This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
You are statistically much more likely to--accidentally or intentionally--kill yourself with a gun than successfully defend yourself against an attacker. Arming minorities will just result in more dead minorities.
I'd like to think that adults can make their own decisions regarding the safety of their lives.
We're talking about people, not numbers and if owning a firearm is legal for someone to do so, I'm going to recommend that they do if they feel it is necessary and are willing to take the necessary precautionary measures as well as complete training with regular practice because these are dangerous weapons.
It's like if someone tells their spouse that they won't do laundry because they can't operate a washing machine then they probably shouldn't be driving a car.
Negligence will always result in some horrific accident but if an adult fears for their life, make your own choices, if negligence is one of those choices, you should've thought about that when you were afraid someone was going to shoot you.
Punishments for gun-related incidents resulting from negligence should be much higher.
People are numbers. Thinking you will be the exception to statistical realities is a fool's errand. And it would be all well and good if the only people who suffered from the myriad gun deaths in this country were the people who bought the guns, but that's not the case. They are also endangering their families and neighbors. It is just objectively true that you and the people around you become less safe, not more, the moment you buy a gun.
As someone who nearly killed myself with a gun and was only stopped because I was too depressed to fill out the paperwork to buy one, my life was directly saved by gun control. If I had lived in a state where buying a gun was easier, I would be dead. If I had still been living with my dad who owns guns, I would be dead. And I am part of a hated minority, just like the people you seek to protect. The statisical reality is that people like me are still more likely to kill ourselves with guns than to be killed by bigots, and moreover, that having a gun on you does not protect you from bigots. It only gives them something to take from you and use against you. Adding a gun to a situation only ever benefits the most violent and unhinged person in that situation.
I fully support euthanasia for terminal and incurable illnesses so if this is an attempt to make me feel guilty about people choosing to die, I don't.
Suicide is not something that is unique to firearms and it never has been.
Saying the availability of something that can kill you is responsible for suicide is like saying education is responsible.
There are much more accessible ways of committing suicide so I personally do not see where you're going with this.
This is not about terminal illnesses. I too support euthanasia. This is about mental illness. The fact is that if more guns are purchased, more mentally ill people will die.
As someone who has attempted suicide many times, I have no idea what you're talking about. The fact is that if you want to end your life reliably and quickly, guns are your best bet by far. As part of being suicidal, I did intensive research into what the best way to kill myself was. The universal conclusion was guns. My other attempts did not work, obviously, and not for lack of trying. It is much, much harder to kill yourself than most people realize. Besides, statistics show that having a gun in the home significantly increases the likelihood of suicide.
Gas stoves used to be a popular method of suicide. Do you know what happened when they stopped being made? Suicides went down. So yes, the method of suicide IS responsible for suicides. It's not true that people will just find another method of killing themselves. Suicide is often undertaken on a whim and people who survive attempts often never wind up killing themselves.
Why would I recommend that someone who is mentally ill buy a gun then? I was wondering why you brought this up in the first place.
Because when you recommend that people arm themselves, you are talking to us too. Mental illness is much more common than you think, and becoming even more common as late capitalism exacerbates the conditions which produce some forms of mental illness. Moreover, mental illness can hit at any time. Someone who showed no symptoms of mental illness before can snap one day and commit suicide or murder their family. When you recklessly recommend that people buy guns, you are increasing the likelihood that someone will commit suicide or homicide, due to mental illness or otherwise.
Yeah, I'd recommend people do whatever it is that they want to do, given that they understand the dangers.
I would like to own a firearm, not for my safety so I'd probably keep it at the gun range, but I know that I am not mentally stable so I don't go and get a firearm, I could but nothing anyone will say is going to stop me if I actually wanted to buy one.
My recommendation for people to arm themselves isn't going to encourage to or dissuade anyone from doing so. They already fear for their lives and they have a right to own them so who am I to say that that shouldn't? Jesus Christ?
You sound like my mother.
Then literally why say it?
Yeah, and maybe they shouldn't. There's lots of dangerous shit you have no right to possess. Guns should be in that category. And for the record, I don't believe the government should be sending armed people to enforce shit either.
Smart woman.
Where in my original comment did I say that, in general, I recommend that people purchase firearms?
Even if they shouldn't, that's what the government is for, not me. Exercise the rights you have, you nor I have the authority to tell people otherwise.
Anything else is fascism and I'd rather not be hypocritical in my beliefs.
You heavily implied that people of color, at least, should purchase firearms.
What? When the government tells you what your rights are that's good and normal, but when a random person tells you what your rights are that's fascism? Nothing about that makes any sense at all.
Heavily implied? So you're assuming that I'm making a generalization without actually having made said generalization?
sigh
Alright, what WAS I supposed to take from your post if not "minorities should arm themselves"?
I will also note that you did not initially deny that you had been making such a recommendation.
Why should I have to deny anything when I fully believe that this line of questioning was pulled out of thin air? I'll note, that you did not simply ask if this is the generalization I was making and the these statements make very little sense.
What part of "people not needing to purchase firearms because of hate and discrimination being ludicrous" is hard to get? Obviously, not everyone needs to have a firearm but to say to someone that things like racial discrimination are not reason to arm yourself is ludicrous.
Shit, people will walk into an LGBTQ+ friendly club and start shooting.
you are saying that discrimination is a reason to arm yourself. people are being discriminated against. therefore, you are saying people should arm themselves. what about this is so hard to understand?
Apparently it is hard for you to understand that not everyone generalizes populations to such an extreme extent as you.
You're assuming the meaning of the statement and all you had to do was ask for clarification but I suppose you never really wanted clarification.
i feel like we've about exhausted this line of inquiry and that maybe the two of you are just better off agreeing to disagree..?
I'm not sure that creating a society of depressed people and then removing their means of self-harm (that are also useful for other things) is the best way to go about things.
While suicide can never be ended, we can work to make a world with fewer desperate people, and major parts of that are things like reducing systemic racism (e.g. this post is an example), and ending capitalism.
I mean, obviously that's not ideal. But even stopgap measures are better than doing nothing, and "let's all just sit around until the socialist revolution and take no other measures to make things better" does not sit well with me.