this post was submitted on 21 Dec 2023
215 points (98.2% liked)

News

23424 readers
2464 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

A federal judge on Wednesday temporarily blocked a California law that would have banned carrying firearms in most public places, ruling that it violates the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution and deprives people of their ability to defend themselves and their loved ones.

The law signed by Gov. Gavin Newsom in September was set to take effect Jan. 1. It would have prohibited people from carrying concealed guns in 26 places including public parks and playgrounds, churches, banks and zoos. The ban would apply whether the person has a permit to carry a concealed weapon or not. One exception would be for privately owned businesses that put up signs saying people are allowed to bring guns on their premises.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] SkyezOpen@lemmy.world 18 points 11 months ago (4 children)

America was founded by guns and it is chock full of them. There is no way to put that genie back in the bottle.

[–] masterspace@lemmy.ca 34 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (4 children)

There literally is, it's called a constitutional amendment and they've been enacted many times before.

Of course, there's not the political will for it, because, like I said, The US is so fucking dumb.

[–] SkyezOpen@lemmy.world 8 points 11 months ago (4 children)

"Hey guys, they passed a constitutional amendment. We better turn all our guns in."

-Like 4 Americans

[–] novibe@lemmy.ml 8 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

Guns wouldn’t disappear overnight ofc. But make owning guns illegal, arrest people who own them and create buyback programs. It might take some time. It might be super fast.

But you know what for sure wouldn’t solve anything? Doing nothing.

[–] masterspace@lemmy.ca 3 points 11 months ago

Like I said:

The US is so fucking dumb

[–] SCB@lemmy.world 3 points 11 months ago

If people want to be felons that's their choice, but it's absurd to suggest any armed resistance would occur, or matter, in such an instance

[–] crusa187@lemmy.ml 3 points 11 months ago

Australia did it and it worked pretty well for them. You just make gun ownership illegal, ask for them back in a reasonable timeframe, and then tell the cops to stop murdering unarmed black people for a minute to go chase down the rest of the guns that weren’t turned in at the end of the process. Then when youre done, you disincentivize bad actors by ramping up the penalties for gun possession significantly, and actually enforce those laws.

It’s not hard, just needs to be done.

[–] andrewta@lemmy.world 6 points 11 months ago (2 children)

As the previous person said there is no way to get it done. Yes there is something called a constitutional amendment, but if there is no realistic way to get it passed then effectively there is no way to get it done.

[–] kent_eh@lemmy.ca 1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

As the previous person said there is no way to get it done

The "we've tried nothing and were all out of isdeas" approach...

[–] SheDiceToday@eslemmy.es 2 points 11 months ago

I mean, I think California just tried something. New York, D.C., New Jersey, Illinois/Chicago, and some other places too.

[–] masterspace@lemmy.ca 0 points 11 months ago

Yes, because the US is so fucking dumb.

[–] Coasting0942@reddthat.com 0 points 11 months ago

But you can’t change the constitution!!!

[–] chitak166@lemmy.world -5 points 11 months ago (1 children)

I think guns and abortion are great distractions because both sides will never stop fighting for them.

Meanwhile, we're all getting fucked as the disparity in wealth continues to grow.

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 11 points 11 months ago (2 children)

People can care about more than one issue.

[–] theyoyomaster@lemmy.world 6 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 children)

If the republicans dropped abortion 100% or the democrats dropped guns 100% either could win nationally in a landslide.

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world -3 points 11 months ago (2 children)

So you're saying if Democrats just ignore mass shooting problems after god knows how many dead schoolchildren, it's worth it for the win?

[–] Kepabar@startrek.website 3 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 children)

No one said ignore mass shootings.

Just gun control in areas it's unpopular.

There are other methods of attacking the problem than gun control. They won't be as effective, but they will be more tolerated by the average American voter.

Take the Florida governorship. DeSantis won out by the skin of his teeth the first go around.

The reason Andrew Gilliam lost was he kept going on about bringing an assault weapons ban to Florida. Such a ban would have never made it though the legislature, so it was an empty promise on top of an unpopular one.

So he shot himself in the foot for no gain and we have been stuck with pudding fingers ever since

Democrats need to understand to pick their battles and read the room.

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world -2 points 11 months ago (1 children)

What exactly do you think Democrats want when it comes to guns? I hope you're not buying the "they're coming to take our guns" rhetoric from Republicans. Because I've been told that my entire life and I'm 46, so I'm thinking that isn't part of their plan.

[–] Kepabar@startrek.website 3 points 11 months ago (1 children)

From my example it's clear the average Florida voter doesn't want an assault weapons ban, that's for sure.

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world -1 points 11 months ago

That's not clear at all. In fact, it's blatantly false.

https://www.mynews13.com/fl/orlando/news/2022/10/04/more-floridians-support-ban-on-assault-weapons

https://www.cbsnews.com/miami/news/majority-florida-voters-support-assault-weapons-ban/

It might be better to check and see if you're correct before making such pronouncements.

[–] theyoyomaster@lemmy.world 2 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 children)

No, but if they stopped actively encouraging them to generate political capital and focused on things that would actually prevent them rather than scapegoating legal and constitutionally protected gun ownership it would not turn away a massive amount of otherwise swing voters.

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world -1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

and focused on things that would actually prevent them

You mean like universal healthcare? Because I'm pretty sure they are focused on that. They also just want to do the absolutely horrible anti-American anti-freedom measure of keeping guns out of the hands of crazy people so there might be a handful fewer dead children.

But I suppose keeping guns out of the hands of crazy people is just scapegoating. After all, when has a psycho ever done anything dangerous?

[–] theyoyomaster@lemmy.world 2 points 11 months ago

So then why does every single proposal overwhelmingly affect law abiding citizens while only serving to give criminals even softer targets?

Also, are you talking about cable news style mass shootings like everyone thinks when they hear the term (Aurora, Pulse etc) or daily gang violence to inflate statistics? They are wildly different issues so actual meaningful solutions aren't one size fits all (but with a surprising overlap).

[–] MotoAsh@lemmy.world -2 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 children)

But will they discuss more than one issue at a time? It's still completely valid to point out how asinine and unnecessary some conversations are. Eating up room is a valid deflection strategy, after all.

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 2 points 11 months ago (1 children)

I don't think it is productive to talk about gun regulation and abortion in the same conversation.

[–] MotoAsh@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 children)

I'm not saying you should mix convos... I'm saying stop dragging out the stupid ones. The other poster is fully correct when they say some conversations are beyond meaningless and are absolutely used to distract people from bigger issues.

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world -1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

It's only a stupid argument if you don't care about children being shot up in schools. Me, I care about that.

[–] MotoAsh@lemmy.world 0 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 children)

Nice gaslighting. Where did I ever say I disagree that it's a problem? Are you seriously going to get so upset that you're going to miss the utterly obvious point of, "don't take the topic change bait"? It's literally the main way people deploy what-about-ism...

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 0 points 11 months ago

I'm pretty sure the attempt at changing the topic was the person who wrote:

I think guns and abortion are great distractions because both sides will never stop fighting for them.

Meanwhile, we’re all getting fucked as the disparity in wealth continues to grow.

Since that is not the topic of conversation in this thread. Hence my replying to them.

[–] winterayars@sh.itjust.works 18 points 11 months ago (3 children)

Sure there is. It's easy.

Just start giving black people guns.

The so-called second amendment absolutists will be calling for draconian gun control measures within a week.

[–] Sorgan71@lemmy.world 17 points 11 months ago

I'm pro gun and I want most black people to own guns.

[–] Mango@lemmy.world 11 points 11 months ago (1 children)

We already do that. They're perfectly welcome to defend themselves and even more so given our police.

[–] winterayars@sh.itjust.works -2 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (2 children)

They aren't.

And aside from that, that's not the point. The point is that, historically, when black people start arming themselves even the NRA starts calling for gun control.

[–] SmoothIsFast@lemmy.world 6 points 11 months ago (2 children)

Yes, that's because gun control is racist and classist.

[–] winterayars@sh.itjust.works -1 points 11 months ago

No that's because the NRA is racist. (And a lot of gun owners, aka the Republican ones, are racist.)

Gun control ends up being racist and classist because that's the gun control that gets bipartisan support.

[–] afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world -1 points 11 months ago

Not wanting schools shot up is racist and classiest apparently.

[–] 52fighters@sopuli.xyz 1 points 11 months ago

I'm 2nd amendment agnostic but I do recognize the fact that policing is different when the population is armed and policing has often been antagonistic to the black community.

[–] atzanteol@sh.itjust.works 6 points 11 months ago

"Arm the homeless"

[–] doppelgangmember@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago

Here's a solution:

Ban straw sales/gun show loopholes, improve auditing/background checks, do gun buybacks above rate, and ban AR sales after X date. Bought before the date, you're grandfathered in but can't sell/gift the weapon.

[–] doppelgangmember@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago

Here's a solution:

Ban straw sales/gun show loopholes, improve auditing/background checks, do gun buybacks above rate, and ban AR sales after X date. Bought before the date, you're grandfathered in but can't sell/gift the weapon.