this post was submitted on 27 Dec 2025
246 points (97.3% liked)

News

33796 readers
3493 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] supamanc@lemmy.world 2 points 19 hours ago* (last edited 18 hours ago) (1 children)

Where did I say that?

You think there aren't laws designed for people like this not to acquire firearms?

Please please wise one, tell me how you plan on enforcing your ban on a country with 450+ million firearms in circulation

Well, funny, I thought we had whole body's of professional lawmakers to handle the details like that, didn't realise I had to do it personally. But OK. A staged approach over 5 or 10 years, with increasing severe penalties for possession, starting with amnesty and buyback, ending with life sentences.

Considering that (I'll point this out ....again) alcohol kills more people...yep you're damn right I'm not giving my firearms up until you can magically fix the issues in this country starting with the fascist fucks who are in power.

How does alcohol kill more? Are you talking health effects or drunk people killing people? Number of firearms used to prevent the fascist takeover which is currently in progress in the country: 0. Number of firearms used to kill a mother and cause life changing injuries to a teenager on Christmas eve: 1 (at least. Let's face, there were probably more)

So...again. You don't care how they die just that guns were the cause. Knives and hands/feet kill more people a year combined than all rifles do...but like I said above you'd be for another AWB.

Guns are the most common murder weapon in the US. Combining several categories to obtain a higher rate is disingenuous. Stating that other weapons are also used in murders does not detract from the fact that guns are overwhelmingly the murder weapon of choice.

So...again. You don't care how they're killed, just that guns did it, so they're bad.

Your comprehensiom skills need some work. A swimming pool is not the go too murder weapon in the majority of cases. If it were, we could and should discuss how to deal with that. But it's not.

Just swerve into civs...one more dead person...just grab the kitchen knife...one more dead person.

Most murders are perpetrated against a specific victim with whom the murder has some sort of grievance. Not random acts of violence. Even so, if cars were being used to murder people at the rates guns were, I'd expect action.

Everything you're listing has one thing in common that you can't seem to focus on. Why they did it in the first place. Your bandaid solution is "ban all guns" (because let's be honest, criminals don't follow laws, so making more restrictions matters zilch to them, they'll get one from the black market).

It doesn't really matter why though. A decision is to kill, and the means to do so, against which the victim is completely defenseless, is instantly available. Moreso than any other weapon. Even if you decide to stab your girlfriend to death, you still have to at least get close enough to do it. A gun is just instant murder. Which means there is no time for second thoughts or changes of heart. The US has a higher murder rate than any comparible country precisely because murder in the US is so easy

[–] SupraMario@lemmy.world 4 points 17 hours ago (1 children)

Well, funny, I thought we had whole body's of professional lawmakers to handle the details like that, didn't realise I had to do it personally. But OK. A staged approach over 5 or 10 years, with increasing severe penalties for possession, starting with amnesty and buyback, ending with life sentences.

So far your body if lawmakers have failed.

So you're end goal is a total ban. Good luck finding people who want to go door to door removing firearms from people...and the criminals will still keep theirs.

How does alcohol kill more? Are you talking health effects or drunk people killing people?

12k~ people a year are killed by drunk drivers. https://www.nhtsa.gov/risky-driving/drunk-driving

Removing suicides, DGUs and cops killing us(1k a year)... you're left with around 11k deaths homicide wise.

Number of firearms used to prevent the fascist takeover which is currently in progress in the country: 0.

Yes because I remember now that we defeated Nazis with thoughts and prayers.

Number of firearms used to kill a mother and cause life changing injuries to a teenager on Christmas eve: 1 (at least. Let's face, there were probably more)

And you think that it was the guns fault? Not that an abusive piece of shit did this...

Also, we're not at the ammo box stage yet. You don't start a war when you have voting options left.

Guns are the most common murder weapon in the US. Combining several categories to obtain a higher rate is disingenuous. Stating that other weapons are also used in murders does not detract from the fact that guns are overwhelmingly the murder weapon of choice.

Yea because how someone is murdered doesn't matter...cause only guns count right? You snap your fingers and magically make the guns vanish and...you really think that people are just gonna stop being violent and killing each other?

Your comprehensiom skills need some work. A swimming pool is not the go too murder weapon in the majority of cases. If it were, we could and should discuss how to deal with that. But it's not.

We were talking about kids, and more kids die from drowning than from school shootings, but you want guns banned because....kids die? If we're going to use your logic then pools probably should go first.

Most murders are perpetrated against a specific victim with whom the murder has some sort of grievance. Not random acts of violence. Even so, if cars were being used to murder people at the rates guns were, I'd expect action.

Yep, and it's mostly gang violence, not random, but no one gives a shit about that. It's only when a school gets shot up. Which means you're assuming that taking the guns away is going to stop people from murdering each other...and they're not going to use some other means.

It doesn't really matter why though.

It absolutely does matter. Crimes of passion are very few, most are from as you stated between two people who know each other and done spur of the moment. Most of which is gang/drug violence. Which is grown from people who don't have safety nets or support systems to help get out of the loop.

A decision is to kill, and the means to do so, against which the victim is completely defenseless, is instantly available.

Are you suggesting that a 110lb woman would be able to defend against a 200lb man if he didn't have a gun? Firearms are literally the greatest equalizer.

Moreso than any other weapon. Even if you decide to stab your girlfriend to death, you still have to at least get close enough to do it.

Do you think that most murders happen at a large distance? Do you even know how many people are killed each year via knives alone? I'll give you a hint, it's 4xs higher than all rifles.

A gun is just instant murder. Which means there is no time for second thoughts or changes of heart.

You've never fired a gun have you? It's not a 1 shot kill machine. Do you really think that someone who's stabbing someone stops and thinks "I shouldn't do this"...

The US has a higher murder rate than any comparible country precisely because murder in the US is so easy

There is no comparable country. That's the problem.

[–] supamanc@lemmy.world 1 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

So you're end goal is a total ban. Good luck finding people who want to go door to door removing firearms from people...and the criminals will still keep theirs.

Please please wise one, tell me how you plan on enforcing your ban on a country with 450+ million firearms in circulation

I am literally responding to the question you proposed. But yes, a total ban seems most prudent.

12k~ people a year are killed by drunk drivers. https://www.nhtsa.gov/risky-driving/drunk-driving

The key difference, as I already said, is intent. People aren't setting out with the intention to get drunk, drive and kill someone. So yes, we should do more to prevent drunk driving. There is a lot more that can be done. Why do we have to pick between reducing drunk driving and reducing murder. As you already said, we're never going to eliminate murder,bit we can make it harder.

And you think that it was the guns fault? Not that an abusive piece of shit did this... ;Are you suggesting that a 110lb woman would be able to defend against a 200lb man if he didn't have a gun? Firearms are literally the greatest equalizer.

If he didn't gave access to a gun, he wouldn't have shot her. Anything beyond that is speculation. But in my opinion, whilst abusive men best their partners to death with depressing frequency, the majority stop somewhere short of actual murder. Whereas when they grab a gun, it tends to end in death. Guns are th great equaliser? So like I said before, this woman should have been sitting on the sofa with a loaded gun at Christmas? Just in case? Guns used in self defence are a myth, the overwhelming majority are used by an aggressor.

It absolutely does matter. Crimes of passion are very few, most are from as you stated between two people who know each other and done spur of the moment.

Exactly, spur of the moment. And when that moment passes, people change their mind. Relatively few murders are actually planned, and when the 'passion' fades so does the desire to kill.

Do you think that most murders happen at a large distance? Do you even know how many people are killed each year via knives alone? I'll give you a hint, it's 4xs higher than all rifles.

What the fuck are you even trying say with your cherry picked statistic here? From your own statistics page, undisclosed firearms make up more deaths than every other non forearm category combined. All firearm combined make up 15x the combination of every non firearms category.

Do you really think that someone who's stabbing someone stops and thinks "I shouldn't do this"...

Yes. Extensive research into the knife crime 'epidemic' in London has shown this happens in about 75% of cases where one person had an knife and intended to stab another.

There is no comparable country. That's the problem.

Ah American exceptionalism. To go with your personal exceptionalism. The beliefbthst you are special, and deserve to keep you guns, no matter the cost to society as a whole.

Yep, and it's mostly gang violence, not random, but no one gives a shit about that.

He says, whilst dismissing it. I care about it. Hence including it in my statistics.

Yes because I remember now that we defeated Nazis with thoughts and prayers.

Moving the goalposts. You were talking about how you need a gun to protect yourself from the fascists in power. Well, they're still in power. And getting more power everyday. And the only ones using their guns are..... The fascists.

[–] SupraMario@lemmy.world 1 points 2 hours ago

I am literally responding to the question you proposed. But yes, a total ban seems most prudent.

I didn't get an answer, but at least you're honest in your insane idea.

The key difference, as I already said, is intent. People aren't setting out with the intention to get drunk, drive and kill someone.

Lol that doesn't make it better. It makes it worse.

So yes, we should do more to prevent drunk driving. There is a lot more that can be done. Why do we have to pick between reducing drunk driving and reducing murder. As you already said, we're never going to eliminate murder,bit we can make it harder.

Again. How do you propose that? You plan on putting breathalyzers in everyone's cars?

If he didn't gave access to a gun, he wouldn't have shot her.

Naa he'd just have stabbed her to death. Or beat her to death with his hands.

Anything beyond that is speculation. But in my opinion, whilst abusive men best their partners to death with depressing frequency, the majority stop somewhere short of actual murder.

https://sanctuaryforfamilies.org/femicide-epidemic/

Furthermore, when compared to male homicides, femicides tend to be more violent and intimate in nature — **women are less likely than men to be killed in a shooting, but more likely to be beaten, stabbed, or strangled. **

They really don't.

Whereas when they grab a gun, it tends to end in death.

As the above states...no they don't.

Guns are th great equaliser? So like I said before, this woman should have been sitting on the sofa with a loaded gun at Christmas?

No, this woman should have had the ability to leave her abusive husband, and not had to rely on him for food/shelter and income. Hence the safety nets I keep talking about.

Guns used in self defence are a myth, the overwhelming majority are used by an aggressor.

They're not. https://ammo.com/research/defensive-gun-use-statistics#defensive-gun-use-sources-references

I hate using this site, but the sources are from the FBI stats. DGUs happen all the time, most of the time a shot isn't even fired.

Exactly, spur of the moment. And when that moment passes, people change their mind. Relatively few murders are actually planned, and when the 'passion' fades so does the desire to kill.

Yep, and you think people stabbing someone to death have a change of heart mid stabbing?

What the fuck are you even trying say with your cherry picked statistic here? From your own statistics page, undisclosed firearms make up more deaths than every other non forearm category combined. All firearm combined make up 15x the combination of every non firearms category.

All firearms combined equal that many because of suicides. My point was that you act like guns are a one trigger dead and require no thought, because they're at a distance, and people wont kill as often because knives or hands take more thought...which isn't true.

Yes. Extensive research into the knife crime 'epidemic' in London has shown this happens in about 75% of cases where one person had an knife and intended to stab another.

Source? Cause that's not the case here in the USA.

Ah American exceptionalism. To go with your personal exceptionalism. The beliefbthst you are special, and deserve to keep you guns, no matter the cost to society as a whole.

As I've stated. We are different. We have no safety nets here, we're massive and have a huge issue with lack of education. So yes we are way different.

He says, whilst dismissing it. I care about it. Hence including it in my statistics.

I didn't dismiss it. I called it out multiple times that without guns(magically disappearing somehow) they would still kill each other. You fix the societal problems that create gangs, the war on drugs, the for profit prisons, the lack of funding for education, the lack of proper paying jobs, the lack of healthcare, etc....that's how you fix gun violence as a whole. Not by trying to remove the tool that's being used.

Moving the goalposts. You were talking about how you need a gun to protect yourself from the fascists in power. Well, they're still in power. And getting more power everyday. And the only ones using their guns are..... The fascists.

Again. We're not at the ammo box yet. And while fascist are around, you wanna disarm everyone....real genius idea.