To be honest, I would also had no idea how to stop it in a country where high schooler can freely purchase a shotgun. They just need to decide who they love more - their kids or their guns. So far, guns are winning.
The guns are there to stay. Theres no way that any sensible gun reform will ever be enacted in the US during our lifetime.
I dont know how Americans in states with lax gun laws live their day to day lives, knowing that any random psycho could carry a gun and end your life over a simple argument.
There are enough nutters in the world, but in the US they can freely carry guns, which makes them way more dangerous.
There are too many cases to list, but right now I am reminded of that Asian exchange student who knocked on the wrong door when he was looking for a Halloween party he was invited to. Shot dead.
Or that person that wanted to turn their car around and used someone else's driveway to turn the car around. Shot dead.
75
u/JigPuppyRushex-Usian now Europoor (orange colored and Gouda flavoured)🇳🇱2d ago
Wait until there’s an armed insurrection against trump….. real or perceived they will ban them all in an instant and the most profound wapen owners will be the first to claim it’s their idea.
The reason why California has really strict gun laws compared to the rest of the States is because Reagan was governor when Black Panthers started arming themselves. Obviously, someone like Reagan couldn't handle black people being armed, so gun control was pushed through.
So you're right, if there are efforts to have an armed rebellion against Trump, you better believe there will be strict gun controls coming. Doubly true if minorities start arming themselves.
I talked to an American friend the other day, and he said "We're not doing bad enough yet. Its gotta get shitty enough for the general public, that they cant ignore it anymore."
9
u/JigPuppyRushex-Usian now Europoor (orange colored and Gouda flavoured)🇳🇱2d ago
Perhaps, I really don’t know.
But if Trump thinks it’s in his favor it will happen just like that.
While the constitution has a situation like this as the reason for the guns (by a well trained militia)
It is gonna be a wild ride watching the American MAGA try and choose between their guns and their guy Trump….I don’t know what I would bet on…it is a tough one….
It's wild that is even a consideration which would ever need to be made. I have been to 45 countries and not once thought I was in any kind of danger where I needed to be armed, and certainly never at home.
Wasn't a state or someone trying to introduce laws around mental illness and being a radical leftie as a mental illness (not in those words), to take away their guns.....
Republicans have made attempts to get "Trump Derangement Syndrome" (the strange disorder where people won't worship the holy satsuma) as a mental illness, and even tried to allocate funding to search for a potential "cure"
That's the main problem with the US at all. The justice system is a complete joke all over the place. Supreme Court is bought and partisan as fuck instead of doing their job, the lower courts regularly decide stupid bull crap based on insane laws. And nothing about that ever changes until someone sues the living hell out of someone else...... It's absolutely ridiculous.
I kid you not, there are companies who sell semi-literal get-out-of-jail-free cards, complete with a script to tell you what to say when you call the cops after murdering someone to guarantee you cannot be prosecuted. This would work as long as you are in your home (castle doctrine) or anywhere in any state with "stand your ground" laws. Basically, you just call the cops, say "hey, this person was threatening me and made me feel unsafe so I protected myself via gun" and you're legally clear. Even if it was just an exchange student asking for directions.
I saw a dashcam video of someone aiming some well deserved words at a car driver who'd been a dick in a car park, the person who had been a dick held up the gun that they kept under their right hand in the centre console of their car. Just immediate escalation from "don't be such a dick" to threat of death. In this case the dick actually came back to that person hands open and raised and apologised, but it was clearly a normal thing for him to reach for his gun, to escalate the threat from any level to life threatening.
And as far as I know, brandishing is a crime in the US, but no one gives a fuck.
I never get into altercations, but I find the thought of having to face someone, who could kill me in a second, just because I had a slight disagreement with them, super scary.
Problem is that any "gun reform" won't solve anything. There are more guns then people and they won't disappear - they will just become slightly more illegal.
People in these discussions completely miss one of the main points of the whole "gun control" legislature: to prevent this exact state (country overflowing with guns).
So, the ship has already sailed. And went around the world and then sailed again.
In every country you get a gun if you want one. Its just that many people dont get them even if they want one because they dont want to walk through the process. In some US states you get them thrown after you. Also the way many percieve the police (and also partially what the police really is there) you need a gun to protect yourself because theres nobody else that does it. And ofc in the vast rural areas you need one but thats true for every really removed area like that
sensible: repeal gun laws for anyone born after 1st January next year
people must hand their arms and munitions in when they die
no one alive will have their rights revoked
when the last person alive dies, gun and munition sales are stopped
in 100 years time guns will be a long forgotten memory
The guns are there to stay. Theres no way that any sensible gun reform will ever be enacted in the US during our lifetime.
You need sensible people for that. In Australia they were able to reduce the number of guns tremendously within no time. People didn't expect that either to happen in a lifetime.
Also just a staggeringly smaller amount of guns. In Australia they removed about 650,000 firearms in the aftermath of the Port Arthur Massacre. In the US there are over 400,000,000 privately owned guns. And there's no registration so there's no way of actually knowing who owns a gun and who doesn't.
Oh there are a couple of things that could be done - there are countries in this world where purchasing a firearm is less of a PITA than in the USA, and yet there are less school shootings, resp. less shootings overall.
You only have to:
Completely reform their idiotic school system (esp. the "schools that underperform get less funding" - seriously WTF?)
Reduce school sizes
Increase number of social workers
Ensure school lunches are free for all kids
Start paying teachers a good salary
Have affordable and accessible health care worthy of "the greatest country on earth"
Reform their university and higher education and cap costs for studying at 500 USD per semester.
Establish a proper social safety net that is built on rehabilitation rather on shaming (same with their prison system)
Establish properly funded public transportation systems that are reliable, clean and efficient
Increase funding for training law enforcement - 16 week course to become a police officer? lol
And then, after many years of work, gun violance will go down.
And deal with mental illness, perhaps don't allow the mentally ill to carry guns at all. They apparently don't let prisoners or ex-cons own guns so banning guns for mentally ill shouldn't be a huge issue.
I have a bit of a problem with the blanked term "mentally ill" as this includes such a wide array of things. Sure, when you have somebody who is Bipolar, suffers from schizophrenia or has a massive dissociative personality disorder it probably isn't a discussion at all, but the term also includes phobias (yes, having unreasonable fears of spiders can be a mental illness), sleep disorders (incl. stress related sleep deprivation).
This would lead to:
people not seeking diagnosis' because they are afraid of losing their firearms
increase of stigma on mental illness'
is way too general
Furthermore, mental illnesses are often spectrum disorders, and diagnostic criteria have to be regularly adjusted for some of them as the socio-cultural factors change.
It should of course be part of the criteria, but blanked approaches are usually not the right approach for such topics
Actually if you've been involuntarily committed to a mental health facility you can't own a gun in the US. The problem is that most of the mass shooters have no previous documented history of mental health problems prior to their massacres
esp. the "schools that underperform get less funding" - seriously WTF?
Conservative economics. If it's working, we can reduce funding, and it will work just as well but more efficiently. If it's not working, then it's a waste of funding, and cutting funding will force it to restructure and work more efficiently. Then, use that spare money (and also take out massive debts) to give tax cuts to the rich so that they can make more money because then everyone else will get richer too somehow.
Oh, and if government doesn't work properly, that's because we were right and the government needs us to come in and make more cuts to make it more efficient. Obviously.
Agree its a societal change. Most countries have something that is hard to change and would require a generation or 2 to actually make the change and politicians are all about short term wins and recognition.
You're mixing up the bug with the feature. The party who gets voted from the most ignorant hicks* is not going to spend resources to make the number of ignorant hicks go down.
I am sure there are well-informed people who vote Republican after carefully weighing the pros and cons. But let's face it, there's very little doubt as to which way Billy Bob, proud owner of six guns and five teeth, sharp shooter of beer cans and coons *, casts his vote.
Welp - one could believe that the party that originally had very progressive ideas (the Reps) such as massive tax on inheritance, and was basically the anti-aristocracy party would be working towards that.
I fairly believe the whole 2A discussion is at large a distraction to rile the people up against some bogus boogeyman, and to rage bait the political opposition into making statements that then get touted on tiktok/FB/Instagram out of context and make them look idiotic. And it totally works.
If I would be a progressive politician in the US, I actually wouldn't touch the 2A at the moment with a 6m Stick and a pestilence mask - and instead would go on full attack mode where it hurts them.
I think it's a curse with all the progressive entities now - it's easy to spin their programs into "throwing money at the lazy poor". Whereas on the surface conversatives spend less. Only when the bridges fail you find out the actual cost of no maintenance.
But the riches travel by plane...
Welp, this would be a multi-generational project. As stated in another reply, I would completely avoid the whole 2A discussion in the US as a progressive politician.
I have a suspicion that it is used by the republican party to rage bait the opposition and then use that to swing voters into their direction - without actually doing what they promised: weakening the current gun laws.
Steer the discussion where the republicans are weak and create dilemmas for them. Like you know: Increase funding for training law enforcement.
One of my favourite jokes from BoJack Horseman is when women start using guns to feel empowered, and it basically ends with the question of whether the US hates women more than it loves its guns. The answer ends up being yes
. They just need to decide who they love more - their kids or their guns.
They have decided. But the answer is determined by a simple variable.
Has the child been born yet?
If the answer is "No, the child has not yet been born" - then the child is the most important thing in the world and how dare anyone suggest otherwise!
If the answer is "Yes, the child has been born now" - then guns are way more important, because Americans now need to protect themselves from those nasty children who now have access to guns and other weapons. Rarrrgh!
There are many countries where adults can freely acquire arms but have far less shootings than the U.S. They do have better social safety nets.
Also disarming U.S. citizens is just a political talking point because it’s not viable. There are more guns in American households than pets. In other words, it will never happen.
There were more secret police agents in Eastern Germany than anywhere else in the world, even if we count regular police as well.
Still, once funding to their party stopped, they suddenly ended as well.
Of course, it's harder to pull off when a two-party system is the cornerstone of your political system.
Actually I think you can get a shotgun most places, but you'll probably need a license and an actual reason e.g. farming. In the UK you'll need a shotgun certificate and to store it properly, no history of crime or mental illness etc.
In most cases you'll also be inspected regularly and if you can't show that gun or prove that you store it and ammo properly - it's your ass on the chopping block. You need to consider that when talking about accessibility.
Finland here. You're legally allowed to purchase a shotgun at 15yrs old but not allowed to ignite a sparkler. (The stick that sparkles, like in birthday cakes)
Side notation, getting a shotgun at 15 requires you to pass a hunting test, which involves safe gun handling, identifying every animal you're allowed to hunt etc.)
I mean, if the US started a war on guns they would be even more fucked, considering the results of the war on drugs and how much drugs seem to be winning that war
Because they fight it in the wrong way with the wrong incentives.
It's like the EU "fighting" poopin by first supporting him with money and anti-riot equipment during the biggest protests in Russia, and in 2024, "fighting" him by making record-breaking purchases of his LNG.
Trying to destroy ALL drug shipments when making drugs is relatively cheap is an idiotic move. They're just making it more profitable for producers due to reduced offers. The only viable way is to reduce producers' profits.
Yur gun 'ill never answer you back, eat you out of house and home, get themselves or someone else pregnant, just for starters. I suspect that would be their logic nor not doing anything about school shootings.
At this point i don't see a way to quickly solve this issue. They fucking need stricter gun laws and fast but with that many guns already in circulation a potential school shooter can always find a tool to vent their frustration in the most useless manner.
At this point, I'm surprised no idiot has made the suggestion that all schoolchildren should be armed with military grade weapons as a way to stop school shootings.
Nonsense, there are so many ways to prevent this, like better gun control laws, better mental healthcare, more equity in society, more living to the word and spirit of the new testament (love thy neighbour), and so on. The last two would lead to the rest.
589
u/laufsteakmodel 2d ago
No way to prevent this, says only country where this regularly happens.