Since Trump’s election, gun groups catering to progressives and people of color report a surge in interest as they look to defend themselves in a country that, to them, feels increasingly unstable.

  • masterspace@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    21 hours ago

    If you remove all guns, there will still be a thing that is number one.

    The children who are not gunned down will not be killed by something else. It just lowers the overall death rate.

    “Needlessly” is extremely undefined. Lots of things occur that are needless or claimed to be needless.

    No it’s not. It’s defined in relation to the child death rates of peer countries.

    https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamapediatrics/fullarticle/2820614

    • SCmSTR@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      14 hours ago

      Finally.

      Okay, so, statistically, gun deaths in the US are strongly correlated to a distinct increase in premature death in kids.

      And that statistic makes owning assault rifles wrong, because, if you remove the rifles from the populace, those deaths would go away. Yeah?

      I’m so for those deaths no longer happening, but I also like having an armed population to fight off, at this point, fascism, if it ever comes to that. Is there another way, where we can have our guns and our children, too?

      Is there correlation that having an armed population with assault rifles always causes school shootings? Is there evidence of it not? Switzerland seems good. Really good gun control for a militia system. I’d be really happy with moving to that. Though, I think the issue Americans would take is that it’s a government militia system and we’re supposed to defend against our own government.

      But, why? Oh god… Don’t tell me this is further southern bullshit “states rights” stuff. I mean, at this point, yeah, we literally have a fascist occupation and right now is not the time to disarm.

      But maybe that’s the reason. The long-standing conflict between North and South in the USA may be THE reason nobody trusts the government and everybody wants to be armed; there’s a low key cold war going on between the north and south that has never been resolved, and a side effect is that when the population is deeply stressed and unhappy, shit like school shootings happen.

      The guns are a sign of non-unity.

      So, fix the conflict, the guns may go away on their own over time.

      But asking people to disarm is like getting the world to de-nuke. And asking people to do it during conflict is… Well, good luck. Because even if the guns don’t provide protection in all instances, it definitely helps people feel more powerful. Though, in my experience it seems to have a calming effect since the people I’ve known don’t want to kill somebody, so they deescalate or leave a situation. I’m going to assume that’s the norm, but it doesn’t change the statistical fact that school shootings are prevalent.

      The issue with removing the ARs from the equation is, multifaceted, obviously. It’s a right that you don’t get back, good luck getting everybody to disarm, compensation, it’s really engrained in culture for a lot of people and you have to convince them to basically change huge aspects of their lives, their hobbies, their heritage, their values, and worldview.

      Do you see any of this differently?

      • masterspace@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        5 hours ago

        Yes, I see it differently. Notice how literally every single other country in the entire world doesn’t do what the US does?