Follow up to clarify that my acceptance of the reality does NOT mean we don’t try to address the issue. I believe we need to do many things to attack it. I’m simply not interested in continuing the discussion with people who want to keep repeating that we need to get rid of guns and shootings are preventable and look at what other countries have done. That’s not a realistic expectation. It simply isn’t.
So let’s talk about how we actually CAN enact change.
Your argument is wrong. There is a precedent. There is no political will on the (R) side but there exists mechanisms to make this a reality.
After a mass shooting in the 90’s Australia passed legislation banning Semi-auto rifles and shotguns from public ownership. This resulted in PREVENTING gun violence. Also gun related suicides and accidents, like the toddlers shooting themselves in the US you hear about all the time.
Sure some criminals would still have guns, but the starting point of the gun being illegal makes it a whole lot easier to take that gun away from a criminal, rather than having to wait until they use that gun to murder someone to take it away.
I agree that we have to talk with a sense of political reality, but that doesn’t mean stop advocating for a response that would actually solve a problem. Especially on a forum full of keyboard warriors, its not like JD is on here developing his new policy positions.
With respect, you are missing the big picture. JD is not telling people to be realistic, no, he is telling people, “don’t look here, nothing to see there, look over here instead” to absolve his tribe’s direct responsibility in this f*cking disaster (guns are the no. 1 danger to american youth).
Yes, horrific airline accidents were once a fact of life. But the industry and govt took aggressive action to reduce them to near zero in the usa.
Yes, car accidents are a fact of life. But the industry and the govt took aggressive action such that the injury and death rates (per mile driven) over the last few decades have dropped by a lot (even though cars have gotten far more dangerous: speed + mass).
No one is saying that there will never ever be another school shooting. What people are saying is that if we took aggressive action (better gun regulation, gun buybacks, uniform national gun policy, mandatory training, ending the cult of guns via public information campaigns, etc.), we could reduce these numbers to near that of other more sane countries, i.e., to very very low numbers.
And this is where you live in some alternate reality funded NRA talking points on Fox News.
@nickFeraligatr the precedent set is 650k guns confiscated from 18 million people. We have almost half a billion private weapons in this country owned by almost 400 million.
I stand by my argument that it is unrealistic to expect the removal of 450 million weapons in a country where it is rooted in the constitution.
Considering I have never paid a dime in NRA support and don’t listen to or watch Fox that’s a real neat claim.
I once claimed, on this forum, that racism will always exist and you’ll never be able to get rid of it, I was called a stupid mother fucker.
If we can have a discussion that outlines realistic means to eliminate 430 million guns then I will change my opinion. Until then, a harsh reality is that guns will continue to exist in this country and there for gun violence will exist.
We can talk all we want about global warming and how bad the cars and planes are and how beneficial it would be to eliminate them. However the reality is that, even with the electric car improvements, we are not going to be rid of the gas and the planes. Therefore everything else that accompanies them, the good and the bad, will continue to exist.
What is wrong with acknowledging this and suggesting we alter the arguments to account for that?
sounds good but I think that you do live in fear, hence the need for firearms… and what about your loved ones when you are not there with your plentiful arms? do you fear for them? if the gun violence was not so prevalent you would not need to arm yourself due to fear of such violence is what I am trying to say. Bad guys with guns exist in all of the world but they tend to prey upon their own kind… they do not go around trying to kill random people, mentally unstable individuals with easy access to firearms is the problem, which is to say there is a need for gun control, not more firearms.
But were the greatest country on earth or so I’ve been told. We have more resources to do the crazy things like float a city with an airstrip on top that can topple nations. I think some small arms we could handle.
@DarkSpeedWorks you just proved my point. The govt didn’t eliminate airline crashes by eliminating the aircrafts. They drastically reduced them and improved air travel through legislation and enacting change within air travel.
It’s not realistic to eliminate all guns. So saying we can reduce gun violence by eliminating guns is like saying eliminate air travel risks by eliminating air travel altogether. Wasn’t gonna happen. So let’s talk about some drastic measures we CAN take.
Americans love to tell ourselves that. We love some smoke blown up our ass, even if we’re the one doing it to ourselves. Again we could use a harsh dose of reality for a lot of things.
https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/house-bill/698
The R’s beholden to the gun lobby killed this.
And the R’s in the Senate killed this:
https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/senate-bill/25/text
Again, no one (sane) is saying ELIMINATE ALL guns. Most people are saying that normal reasonable national regulation would work. And a partial gun buyback. Because half a billion guns is just effing crazy.
“Assault weapons — military-style firearms designed to fire rapidly — are a threat to our national security, and we should treat them as such,” Biden wrote in his weekend op-ed. “Anyone who pretends there’s nothing we can do is lying — and holding that view should be disqualifying for anyone seeking to lead our country.”
as someone who sees no need for firearms for protection, I am therefore somewhat biased, but the US situation is one where there are so many guns the excuse is it is too hard to start. If there is no start then it will continue as is. A start would be making sure mentally unstable persons do not have access to firearms, a start would be banning high capacity assault weapons, a start would be to enforce and strengthen firearm purchase regulations, a start might be firearm buy backs, there are a lot of ways to start. In time like drinking and driving the culture will look at it as unacceptable and the issue will decline. No one is so crazy as to expect it to go away.
Enough people have talked about it. I think we would all agree reasonable regulation is needed. In fact I’m in favor of some unreasonable regulation; I don’t give a ■■■■ how inconvenient it might be for owners.
Regarding numbers… if half a billion is crazy then what number of guns isn’t crazy?
Sure we can ban “assault style weapons that fire rapidly” however in terms of “what can be done” this would help reduce a minuscule amount of gun deaths in terms of total gun deaths.
People discuss assault weapons and ARs like they are the biggest issue. In 2022 handguns we’re reaping single for 14x more deaths than rifles. And knives/cutting/stabbing was 3x more than rifles.
So yes we can take the parroted “ban assault weapons” approach but that’s not going to make an impact on overall numbers.
I’m more a fan of taxes, mandating storage and proof, random checks, large fines and harsh sentences, mandated trainings, mandated mental health screenings, zero tolerance with associated violence etc.
Personally I think that would have a far greater impact on reducing gun violence and death than banning assault weapons.
Looking into the half a billion stat (450mm) because I wanted to see what the yearly growth number is.
This article states that its 450 million sold since 1899. And I don’t think all those guns are still around, also not the kind of guns someone uses in a modern mass shooting (no one is using a lever action rifle, just a modern bump stock). So there is some percentage of attrition to that number overall, and a level of old weapons that would not be bought back.
So thinking about incremental improvement to the situation, we can start by stemming the 10-20 million a year net new guns.
My wife grew up with arms. Her father had around 120 when he died a few years ago and left most of them to us.
Our boys have been shooting since they were about four years old and are trained on 22 LR pistols up to 50 BMG rifles.
Our “go to” self-defense arms are a small armoury of AR-15s with 223 Wylde chambers and Glocks chambered in 40 S&W.