• RedditWanderer@lemmy.world
    cake
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    32
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    8 months ago

    You don’t need me to tell you that. You wouldn’t believe me anyway. There are plenty of professionals who have studied and acquired factual data of how other “perfect countries” do it and the differences. From the differences the solutions become very clear.

    It’s about restricting access, not banning. There’s no one size fits all solution because nothing is perfect so you pick your poison. Find a country where this doesn’t happen every day (so any developed country), look a the way they do things and pick the one you prefer to support - they all have upsides and downsides. What you have isn’t working though.

    • SupraMario@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      17
      ·
      8 months ago

      Every country that has basically an effective ban, also has safety nets for the people, doesn’t have a gang problem like we do, and focuses on education and not locking everyone up. They also never had 450+ million firearms in civilian hands. So please share with the class how you think you could pull it off without having all those safety nets in place.

        • SupraMario@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          9
          ·
          8 months ago

          I’m fine with adding in the safety nets, they’ll do 100xs more than any regulation you put in place will do. I’m not ok giving over a monopoly on force to people like the current Republicans. Why any of you think that’s a good idea is just insane.

          • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            8 months ago

            How does regulating guns so this sort of thing doesn’t happen again give Republicans a monopoly on force?

            You think the only way to even out the odds is to keep guns in the hands of dangerously mentally ill people? Really?

            • SupraMario@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              8 months ago

              Because the only way for shit like this to not happen in your world of gun regulation, requires a total ban.

              And a total ban gives whoever is in charge of the government a monopoly on force.

              People like you will call Republicans nazis and fascist…then want to remove any force multiplier from civs and then pray they don’t get elected. You’re naive at best and ignorant at worse.

              • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                8 months ago

                The only way to stop severely mentally ill people from obtaining guns is a total ban? Are you absolutely sure about that? There’s no regulation out that that would mitigate the problem?

          • iegod@lemm.ee
            cake
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            8 months ago

            Wtf are you going to do here, go out shooting them or some bullshit? You really think you have any chance against the feds regardless of what side you swing for? That sounds pretty crazy to me. So let’s get real and understand your guns are for recreation not safety against tyranny.

            • Seasoned_Greetings@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              8 months ago

              Friendly reminder that this guy mayoi is a troll. He’s baiting you. Or trying to. His bait has been pretty uninspired lately

            • SupraMario@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              8 months ago

              Vietnam, Afghanistan, Iraq all want a word with your complete lack of how wars are fought now.

              Also your neighbor is a gun owner, so when they bomb his house your shit is getting pushed in as well.

      • SkepticalButOpenMinded@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        8 months ago

        That’s an exaggeration. The US has a better safety net than a lot of countries with much less gun death and violence. Education could better for a rich country, but is not bad. I am all for locking fewer people up, but that’s not the reason there’s gun violence.

        This is always the argument against improving anything in the US. “We’re too special!” It’s just not true. Background checks, wait times, permit requirements, concealed carry restrictions, domestic violence restrictions, etc. These have all been empirically shown to reduce gun deaths in the US.

      • Bytemeister@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        Ελληνικά
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        Maybe put those safety nets in place? Offer buy-backs on firearms, or a grace period to turn in unregistered firearms with no questions? Crack down on fraudulent “theft” and loss reports? Modernize the firearms database? Create incentives for law enforcement to execute red-flag laws? Require a higher level of training and responsibility to own a firearm?

        Literally doing the bare minimum and just effectively enforcing the laws on the books would make a huge improvement, but we can’t even do that because republicans like to whip up the base with the idea that their right to own an AR-15 is going to stop the liburl gubment from takin awah mah rites!