1614
Say the line (lemmy.world)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] brygphilomena@lemmy.world 80 points 1 week ago

My opinion is that these shootings are a greater failure in this country than simply gun control. There is a LOT we need to work on to decrease mass shootings. While I admit, I am more on the personal responsibility side of the gun control debate, I am not against well thought through legislation. I don't think that most of the proposals for gun control are rational, detailed, and written with an even cursory understanding of firearms.

To start to address mass shootings, I believe that we need to expand our healthcare in this country. Both physical and mental healthcare. If people are physically well, and can get treatment that doesn't threaten to bankrupt them, then they will have more opportunities to develop better coping mechanisms. They will be able to seek healthcare options and not feel like they are left to fend for themselves. The isolation from a society that doesn't care or help them is detrimental, and while I have no studies to back it up, I would think that a society with a healthcare system thats prerogative is the patient instead of profit would help.

I think the aspect of mental healthcare speaks for itself. So people don't lash out and can seek other means of dealing with issues. I also believe that the stigma of seeking mental healthcare and it's ability to impact people's rights and job prospects is a hindrance. We should not make it so that if someone seems help, that they are punished for it.

I believe we have a big culture shift that needs to occur. Too much do we use rhetoric that reinforces that firearms and gun violence is the ultimate solution to a disagreement. "Fuck around and find out" when used in the context of firearms is terrible. Firearms should be considered the last resort to protect life. Not property and not your feelings.

Firearms are not conflict resolution! We need to work to give people better ways of solving and deescalating conflicts.

We need to work on our wealth disparity. We should be elevating our poorest so that they don't have to resort to violence or crime. As most firearm crimes are not mass shootings, we need to address the other parts of firearm use.

We need to work on our community involvement. Bring people together, break down the walls between us, and get past the cliques.

There is a lot we need to do, but gun control is only a small piece of solving gun violence.

[-] wieson@feddit.org 25 points 1 week ago

Addition:

Stop the 24 hour news cycle and please please please stop naming criminals by name and showing their faces. Delete the "claim to fame" angle that comes with horrible crimes.

For community involvement, what comes to mind for me is: walkable neighbourhoods, libraries even in small towns and local sports clubs.

But there must be a minimum of gun laws: Buying, owning, operating only under license, storage at home in a safe and ammunition in a separate safe. That's really the bare minimum.

[-] brygphilomena@lemmy.world 9 points 1 week ago

Regarding the news cycle. Yes! Stop the 24 hour, constant fear being fed to the populace.

You are remarkably safe in your own home. Get rid of the fear mongering!

Stop making national news of local issues. The constant national attention to some random horrible things that doesn't affect 99.99% of the viewership doesn't need to be highlighted.

I'm not against gun laws, but I'm going to disagree with your minimums. Anything regarding storage is essentially unenforceable until after a tragedy has occurred. It can't be used to preempt a shooting but only to punish the owners afterwards. Those sort of things need to be community driven. The gun community should be talking about storage more and shaming those that don't follow it.

It also implies that everyone's situation at home allows them 1) to purchase two safes and 2) to have room for two safes and 3) limits their ownership of either guns or ammo to the size of that safe. It also doesn't make much sense to have two safes if the person doing the shooting is the one that is buying the ammo and guns in the first place. It also places undue burdens on those that do not have children and do not have children that come into their home.

As much as it is laughed at in California, but when you buy a gun you either need to bring a lock or buy a lock with it. They are the cheapest things, but it's at least a minimum safety that isn't onerous. Even if no one uses them once they get the gun home.

As for operating under a license, what would that do beyond the existing restrictions for procuring firearms? Do they expire and what would happen then?

We need comprehensive laws grounded in addressing specific issues, not something to create an idealistic and narrow view of what gun ownership is or should be.

I think we should have federal programs on gun information and educational programs. We can teach people and build a culture on gun safety and storage. Maybe programs to subsidize the purchasing of safes and reimburse or reward owners that make safe choices.

[-] wieson@feddit.org 6 points 1 week ago

Anything regarding storage is essentially unenforceable until after a tragedy has occurred.

One could require a receipt or proof of purchase for a safe or a lock when buying a gun.

It also implies that everyone's situation at home allows them 1) to purchase two safes and 2) to have room for two safes and 3) limits their ownership of either guns or ammo to the size of that safe.

That's intentional.

It also doesn't make much sense to have two safes if the person doing the shooting is the one that is buying the ammo and guns in the first place.

We need comprehensive laws grounded in addressing specific issues

I was specifically addressing teenagers access to their parents guns, specifically to prevent school shootings.

As for operating under a license, what would that do beyond the existing restrictions for procuring firearms? Do they expire and what would happen then?

Like a car license. You may not be checked all the time, but every once in a while and it's a crime to not have it if you're driving.

[-] brygphilomena@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago

One could require a receipt or proof of purchase for a safe or a lock when buying a gun.

That's why in CA they make you buy a lock. But I don't really know anyone that uses the one they had to buy.

That's intentional.

This means only rich or well to do people can own guns?

I was specifically addressing teenagers access to their parents guns, specifically to prevent school shootings.

I'm okay with storage laws in homes that are primary residences to minors. But I don't believe that any storage law on its own prevents it. There is no way to ensure it's being following once the gun is taken home. It's why I am much more in favor of trying to influence gun culture to make improper storage stigmatizing.

Like a car license. You may not be checked all the time, but every once in a while and it's a crime to not have it if you're driving.

Those with concealed carry licenses do get checked as they are to tell an officer when they are carrying. I wouldn't be against these laws being federal. As for just ownership, do you just check everyone if they have a license or only when the police see the gun? Or when they go shooting on public BLM land?

The analogy for driving breaks down because you can buy a car without a license. You just can't drive it on public roads. Though you can on private roads without a license.

load more comments (7 replies)
load more comments (8 replies)
load more comments (50 replies)
this post was submitted on 05 Sep 2024
1614 points (98.3% liked)

Political Memes

5219 readers
3637 users here now

Welcome to politcal memes!

These are our rules:

Be civilJokes are okay, but don’t intentionally harass or disturb any member of our community. Sexism, racism and bigotry are not allowed. Good faith argumentation only. No posts discouraging people to vote or shaming people for voting.

No misinformationDon’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.

Posts should be memesRandom pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.

No bots, spam or self-promotionFollow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS