3 ms·
> Back in 2017, we had the deadliest mass shooting in American history - over 50 deaths and over 400 gunshot wounds (!!!!) [0] - and precisely nothing has happe
by DuskStar 8y ago
> Back in 2017, we had the deadliest mass shooting in American history - over 50 deaths and over 400 gunshot wounds (!!!!) [0] - and precisely nothing has happened. The suicide and assault rates, including school shootings and other mass shootings, has only increased over time, with more deaths every year.
You're right, we should have immediately banned all firearms nationally to prevent something like this from happening again, trampling all over the 2nd amendment. (nevermind how the hell you'd implement it without a thousand Ruby Ridges and Wacos, or why you expect to find more than a third of the guns in the first place [0]) It's not like he could have crashed a plane loaded with AMFO into the crowd instead, right? Or maybe we should just expand California's gun laws nationally, since that's worked out so well to stop the mass shootings there.
You say "OMG how haven't we fixed this, it must mean we don't care" while proposing no solutions, for a problem that might not have a solution. Britain still has terrorist attacks (vans, acid, knives) and that's after banning carrying a fucking butter knife. Humans will always find ways to kill each other, (checkout improvised prison weapons sometime) let's not go too crazy hunting down one of the smallest sources.
So, maybe our response to shootings shouldn't be compared to our response to crumbling infrastructure. At least with the infrastructure, there's a path forward that almost everyone would agree would work. That's not the case with guns.
0: http://reason.com/archives/2012/12/22/gun-restrictions-have-always-bred-defian http://reason.com/archives/2012/12/22/gun-restrictions-have-...
- phillipcarter 8y ago> You're right, we should have immediately banned all firearms nationally Yes.
- hnaccount141 8y agoWhy even bring up guns in the first place if you're not willing to have a good faith discussion of the topic?
- blattimwind 8y ago> You say "OMG how haven't we fixed this, it must mean we don't care" while proposing no solutions, for a problem that might not have a solution. Britain still has terrorist attacks (vans, acid, knives) and that's after banning carrying a fucking butter knife. Humans will always find ways to kill each other, (checkout improvised prison weapons sometime) let's not go too crazy hunting down one of the smallest sources. Britain, and specifically London, seems to rival Paris and Brussels in terms of gang violence, but you still get a lot less dead people than in the US. You're suggesting there might not be a solution, yet practically no Western state except the US has this problem in the first place.
- DuskStar 8y agoThere's a whole bunch of proposed reasons for the US's murder rate, and you're right that one of them is guns. But the US is an incredibly extreme outlier on a whole bunch of metrics, and gun ownership is just one of them.