3 ms·

>In every other, let's say, G20 country, someone shooting up a shopping mall and killing 20 will absolutely make national news - they will talk about it for mon

>In every other, let's say, G20 country, someone shooting up a shopping mall and killing 20 will absolutely make national news - they will talk about it for months and it will be ranked "top ten worst news for $country in 2019", if not the absolute worst. I don't think this would apply to China and India. Every other country in the world has a lower national population than the US. Yet I doubt that your statement even applies to countries such as Brazil and Nigeria. You really do have to take population numbers into account when you look at what the media focuses on. No other western country even comes close to the population the US has, so it gives the impression that the US is somehow much worse.

rsynnott 7y ago
It looks like there’ve been about four mass shootings in China since 1990; a couple criminal (robbery-related), one terrorist, one random. Of course, information out of China isn’t that reliable, you could argue. The EU as a whole is considerably bigger than the US, and every year or so there’s a mass shooting or other mass killing. And it’s huge news for a long time. The UK has about a fifth as many people as the US, and this century has had five mass killings (one of which involved guns). The US rate and attitude really is abnormal. Edit: It’s also worth noting that the vast majority of European mass killing incidents are terroristic; the “someone just shoots a bunch of people for no particularly discernible reason” thing is really, really rare. The Texas shooting (terroristic) would be extremely shocking in any European country and would dominate the news for a long time. But the Ohio one (looks non-terroristic) would probably have an even bigger impact and would likely lead to tightening of gun laws etc (the Dunblane massacre lead to the banning of almost all handguns in the UK, for instance).
- umvi 7y ago
  Well it turns out gun crime under totalitarian regimes is usually pretty low. So it's not very useful to say things like "Look at North Korea! They have way lower gun deaths and mass shootings rates than America!" If you trade all of your freedoms for securities, you too can have a totalitarian regime that keeps you safe. It's a "slippery" slope that can take centuries, but you just keep losing a few freedoms here, a few there, and pretty soon your monolithic monstrosity of a government holds all the cards.
  - yongjik 7y ago
    Who's talking about North Korea? We're talking about South Korea, Japan, and the entire western Europe. > If you trade all of your freedoms for securities, you too can have a totalitarian regime that keeps you safe. Totalitarian regime usually have worse security because nobody can criticize the supreme leader and they can simply make an inconvenient news item (like an unsolved murder) go away. Your slippery slope isn't even in the correct direction. No society is perfect, but it's quite possible to have a safe and free society. But you should be willing to make reasonable compromises instead of arguing from centuries-old aphorisms.
    - umvi 7y ago
      > Who's talking about North Korea? The person I directly responded to was talking about China, which is YAGFTR (yet another gun-free totalitarian regime). > No society is perfect, but it's quite possible to have a safe and free society. That also lasts a long time without lapsing back into being YAGFTR? Japan was YAGFTR less than 75 years ago, same with a lot of currently "safe and free societies". I am skeptical that a gun-free society can last hundreds of years without it lapsing back to being YAGFTR but I suppose time will tell

rsynnott 7y ago

It looks like there’ve been about four mass shootings in China since 1990; a couple criminal (robbery-related), one terrorist, one random. Of course, information out of China isn’t that reliable, you could argue. The EU as a whole is considerably bigger than the US, and every year or so there’s a mass shooting or other mass killing. And it’s huge news for a long time. The UK has about a fifth as many people as the US, and this century has had five mass killings (one of which involved guns). The US rate and attitude really is abnormal. Edit: It’s also worth noting that the vast majority of European mass killing incidents are terroristic; the “someone just shoots a bunch of people for no particularly discernible reason” thing is really, really rare. The Texas shooting (terroristic) would be extremely shocking in any European country and would dominate the news for a long time. But the Ohio one (looks non-terroristic) would probably have an even bigger impact and would likely lead to tightening of gun laws etc (the Dunblane massacre lead to the banning of almost all handguns in the UK, for instance).

umvi 7y ago
Well it turns out gun crime under totalitarian regimes is usually pretty low. So it's not very useful to say things like "Look at North Korea! They have way lower gun deaths and mass shootings rates than America!" If you trade all of your freedoms for securities, you too can have a totalitarian regime that keeps you safe. It's a "slippery" slope that can take centuries, but you just keep losing a few freedoms here, a few there, and pretty soon your monolithic monstrosity of a government holds all the cards.
- yongjik 7y ago
  Who's talking about North Korea? We're talking about South Korea, Japan, and the entire western Europe. > If you trade all of your freedoms for securities, you too can have a totalitarian regime that keeps you safe. Totalitarian regime usually have worse security because nobody can criticize the supreme leader and they can simply make an inconvenient news item (like an unsolved murder) go away. Your slippery slope isn't even in the correct direction. No society is perfect, but it's quite possible to have a safe and free society. But you should be willing to make reasonable compromises instead of arguing from centuries-old aphorisms.
  - umvi 7y ago
    > Who's talking about North Korea? The person I directly responded to was talking about China, which is YAGFTR (yet another gun-free totalitarian regime). > No society is perfect, but it's quite possible to have a safe and free society. That also lasts a long time without lapsing back into being YAGFTR? Japan was YAGFTR less than 75 years ago, same with a lot of currently "safe and free societies". I am skeptical that a gun-free society can last hundreds of years without it lapsing back to being YAGFTR but I suppose time will tell