325
submitted 1 year ago by HowRu68@lemmy.world to c/worldnews@lemmy.ml
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] Veraticus@lib.lgbt 132 points 1 year ago

‘No Way To Prevent This,’ Says Only Nation Where This Regularly Happens

[-] freagle@lemmygrad.ml 7 points 1 year ago

Average of 2.2 mass shooting every day this year

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] frostwhitewolf@lemmy.world 76 points 1 year ago

Just absolutely mind boggling how frequently this happens and literally nothing is being done about it. What a sick country.

[-] Raphael@lemmy.world 17 points 1 year ago

They ARE doing something about it.

Financing the whole thing!

[-] HowRu68@lemmy.world 9 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

"They ARE doing something about it. Financing the whole thing!".

No they are not. You seem also out of control, buddy.

It's all a mix of the second ammendment, their interpretation & execution of that law, a dominant military and guns lobby system (Billionaire$); people loving their guns, no access to good (mental) health care, which allthogether is holding their country hostage, imho.

So yeah, its all out of control. And nothing has changed, except that it's getting worse.

add.(mental) healthcare

load more comments (9 replies)
[-] coffeebiscuit@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago

Which is, sadly, working very well.

[-] trifictional@lemmy.world 12 points 1 year ago

And somehow some people are going to use this as reasoning that they need more guns to defend themselves.

[-] FlyLikeAMouse@feddit.uk 37 points 1 year ago

For all its foibles and peculiarities, the US’ apparently almost fetishistic relationship with guns is far and away the hardest for me to understand as an outside observer.

[-] willmo@lemmy.world 20 points 1 year ago

Trust me, I live here and I don’t get it either. And when you ask people they’ll tell you they have guns because other people have guns so they need it for protection. So you guys all have guns because you’re scared other people have guns?? Great recipe.

[-] givesomefucks@lemmy.world 17 points 1 year ago

Play by the rules of the game you're playing.

Not the rules of the game you want to play.

If only the crazies have guns, they're going to start acting a lot crazier. Does it magically make everything safer to have your own? Obviously not. Statistically you're more likely to shoot yourself.

But until we pass actual gun control, it's hard to judge someone for having a gun.

[-] MrVilliam@lemmy.world 15 points 1 year ago

I bought my first gun right after the fat dipshit won the 2016 election. I realized that there were many more hateful, violent, dumbasses here than I'd ever imagined. I lived in a very red county at the time and I didn't think it was impossible that they might "leak" lists of registered non-Republican voters' info along with stochastic terroristic speech like "it'd be nice if my supporters who also support the 2nd amendment could do something about these misguided people."

I'm less worried about that now for various reasons, but we're not completely out of the fascist woods yet. There's a deep, festering rot and we've only treated symptoms. Until we address campaign finance, education funding, disinformation, and stronger market regulation and trust busting, we're just kicking the can down the road.

load more comments (5 replies)
[-] minorsecond@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 year ago

That's what my wife says. I want to sell our gun and she's anti-gun too. But she doesn't want to get rid of our gun until guns are banned.

[-] fruitywelsh@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago

The fireworks on the 4th of July are to represent the firearms and cannons citizens owned and used in rebellion towards a tyrannical government.

That concept is written into our constition or declaration of being a country, and passed down into our myths and celebrations.

load more comments (4 replies)
[-] PowerCrazy@lemmy.ml 22 points 1 year ago

Meanwhile, over 500 people have been killed by police in 2023 so far, and yet we never hear the president comment on that. Maybe we should be disarming the police?

[-] christophski@feddit.uk 24 points 1 year ago
load more comments (10 replies)
[-] HowRu68@lemmy.world 22 points 1 year ago

"Fifteen people were killed and 94 injured across 13 states as well as Washington DC".

These massshootings are so out of control..

[-] Snorf@reddthat.com 2 points 1 year ago

Always have been

[-] Fishe_stix@lemmy.world 21 points 1 year ago

The president again parrots "assault rifle" and magazine capacity bans, which only pushes actual reform further out of reach. We lack a centralized database of ownership, private sale registration but we are able to keep a computer database of prescription medications so a kid doesn't get his Adderall a day early. We register cars regardless of type of sale and require a license to drive but firearms are freely sold by private sale with no requirements to register or license the user. We suspend driving privileges for nonpayment of debts, but you are expected to be honest about being a fugitive when filling out ffl forms. If we don't treat firearms at least as seriously as cars, why does the magazine capacity matter? Why do people who can't define the term assault rifle calling for reforms based on nuanced features of firearms.

This cycle just repeats. Someone tries to ban magazine size or something they know nothing about and any chance of meaningful reform is over. I would gladly submit to more stringent background checks, registration, and proof of competency. But when the conversation starts out with banning scary black rifles or magazines over 10 rounds I know nothing will change. These suggestions are worthless and make gun owners unwilling to engage.

Imagine we wanted to cut down on traffic crashes so the suggestion is made by someone who does drive to limit fuel tank size or ban "sports cars". Of course no one can define sports car, and gas tanks don't make people drive recklessly, but the person proposing the law doesn't know anything about cars. Car enthusiasts would roll their eyes and consider the attempt a joke. But instead we have speed limits, vehicle registration, driver license requirements, and safety standards that actually make cars safer. You can own a Porsche, but if you break the law your registration will be used to find you and your driver's license in jeopardy.

Americans aren't going to give up guns. But there is hope that current technology could better regulate ownership and usage. Unfortunately idiotic hollow statements about magazine size and the assault rifle boogy man make those who could facilitate change look foolish.

[-] dan@lemm.ee 19 points 1 year ago

Holy fucking shit what a ridiculous country.

[-] Pergle@reddthat.com 15 points 1 year ago

It seems like common sense to make guns have the same requirements as cars. You need to pass a short course and get a license. I don't understand what is unclear about the 2nd amendment: “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”

Right there, in the text: "Well regulated".

[-] galloog1@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago

Well regulated, as in well maintained. Additionally, it is a conditional clause providing the context for its existence. Taking this legal approach has never worked in court. The Constitution was written to be changed for a reason but we are afraid to or it is opposed.

[-] stankbucket@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

It's not a matter of fear. It's a matter of not being able to get the votes. It's not a simple majority to make a major change like that and it should not be.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Valmond@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

And you can, it seems, I mean if you want to, you can amend it...

[-] fruitywelsh@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Part of it is the wording is "(justification for the amendment) (actual limitation on the governments power)" so the reason the government shall not infringed on the right to bear arms is because that supports the creation of well regulated militias necessary to secure a free state.

[-] thorbot@lemmy.world 15 points 1 year ago

"We've tried nothing, and we're all out of ideas!"

[-] Omen2819@lemmy.world 12 points 1 year ago

This is why we chose to stay home on holidays. I feel bad that my kids are missing out, but I would rather have them miss some fireworks than risk becoming a statistic.

load more comments (5 replies)
[-] sparky@lemmy.federate.cc 11 points 1 year ago

Absolutely out of control.

[-] lntl@lemmy.sdf.org 10 points 1 year ago

America needs gun violence so that when its military does violence, the people are numb to it.

[-] trias10@lemmy.world 9 points 1 year ago

Just a part of the 4th of July experience really

[-] MrMonkey@lemm.ee 7 points 1 year ago

Every time I ask this question:

What lae do you propose, that didn't already exist, wouldn't violate the Bill of Rights, and wouldn't cause a civil war?

Most of the time I either get answers that include laws that exist that the government doesn't enforce, or a "fuck the constitution, let's have a civil war!"

For example the army is supposed to report people discharged distribution to the NCIS. They don't.

The ATF is supposed to follow up when a banned individual tries to buy a gun. They don't.

The ATF is supposed to check on people when gun dealers report them for attempted straw purchases. They don't.

Know someone who had illegal weapons? Call the police and see what they do. Here's a hint: nothing

So, does anyone have one?

[-] BartsBigBugBag@lemmy.tf 8 points 1 year ago

Most crime, including mass shootings, are an outgrowth of material conditions in a given society. You can’t resolve those material conditions with reactive policies like you’ve outlined below, you have to act proactively. You want less white disaffected individuals shooting people, then work to bring those people into the fold. Ban right wing media that pushes entirely false narratives. Give everyone an irreducible minimum that gives them space to exist without constant coercion from society to self-enslave. Drop 70+% off the military budget and put ALL of it into social programs. Welfare, public housing, community centers, public works programs, etc. There’s infinite ways to resolve this, not a single one of them involves reactive policy.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] fugepe@lemmy.ml 7 points 1 year ago

You already know who are the problem. The USA is cloaca maxima

[-] LeZero@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

As American as apple pie, seems horribly fitting

[-] red@feddit.de 3 points 1 year ago

Way more Americam than apple pie. Apple pie isn't American at all. The Americas didn't even have apples, initially.

[-] chachimenachi@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago

Ah yes, land of da free

load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 05 Jul 2023
325 points (95.0% liked)

World News

32517 readers
372 users here now

News from around the world!

Rules:

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS