4 ms·

How many people die from mass shootings per year? Now compare that to the number of people that die in car accidents. It’s not even close. I do not want our c

How many people die from mass shootings per year? Now compare that to the number of people that die in car accidents. It’s not even close. I do not want our civil liberties eroded in any way because of mass shootings. Government always uses emotional tragedies to grab authoritarian power.

dane-pgp 4y ago
To be fair, there are already a lot of regulations about who can drive a car (on public roads) and which sorts of cars can be used. Be careful that you're not inadvertently asking for social media to be regulated more like cars. Fortunately, however, there are plenty of countries that have fewer mass shootings and arguably better protection of civil liberties than the US, so they might provide some inspiration.
ceejayoz 4y ago
> How many people die from mass shootings per year? Now compare that to the number of people that die in car accidents. I mean, to take my car out in public, I'm required to have a license, registration, inspection, various safety devices, and follow a variety of usage rules.
- HideousKojima 4y ago
  You can still buy or build a car without any of that for use on your own property or other private places that allow it, but there's no practical barrier to you taking it out on public roads other than the risk of being pulled over and ticketed.
  - ceejayoz 4y ago
    Sure. Same's true for a gun. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Privately_made_firearm https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Privately_made_firearm
- throwaway0a5e 4y ago
  Unless "do whatever you want on private property and do a pretty wide range of things in public with a trivially easy to get license" is your policy goal you probably don't want to bring up the car comparison.
  - ceejayoz 4y ago
    Why? “Trivially easy to get license” would be an improvement here.
    - throwaway0a5e 4y ago
      We already generally subject firearms stuff to licensing if you want to have your armaments with you in public. Some states have basically none. Some states have onerous regulation. We'll split the difference. Across the whole nation we have a fairly substantial set of restrictions on what you can and can't own, regardless of whether or not you only ever use it on private property (there are no such restrictions for cars). So the net effect would be mostly no change in public and a massive net loosening of restrictions in private. Personally I'm fine with this. But I think you'll probably be clamoring to have the status qou back as soon as your local extremists start posting youtube videos of 14yos firing mortars at their summer BBQ.
- salawat 4y ago
  All of that came out of law enforcement whining that cars made pursuits and catching criminals too difficult back in the day, turning one of the most fundamental freedoms, (freedom to locomote) into a government gated privilege. Laying the foundation for an eventual effective surveillance state. Not buying it.
  - ceejayoz 4y ago
    The first US states to require licenses were in 1903. Long before police pursuits were much of a thing. The airbag requirements certainly have nothing to do with it, either.
- sixQuarks 4y ago
  Yes, but there are still over 40,000 deaths per year in car accidents in the US alone. If car accident deaths had the same emotional reaction as mass shootings, people would demand the government setup checkpoints at every intersection to "better monitor the drivers"
root_axis 4y ago
What is the point of this arbitrary comparison? Yes, there are more automotive deaths than mass shooting deaths, so what? Are you trying to say mass shootings are no big deal because car accidents kill more people or do you have some kind of principled stance against government investigations? > Government always uses emotional tragedies to grab authoritarian power Is that what you think is happening here? If so, could you please elaborate on why you think this?
- sixQuarks 4y ago
  I was replying to this specific part: * "We should better monitor these sites" might be an entirely valid conclusion.* No, we should not have to monitor sites for the minuscule chance that a psychopath is planning a mass shooting. Senators are already pushing this type of surveillance on social media, it's a matter of time before this type of surveillance is used against thought crimes, and people that don't agree with the establishment.
rightbyte 4y ago
446 people were killed in mass shootings in the US in 2020. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mass_shootings_in_the_United_States_in_2020 https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mass_shootings_in_th... 19 384 homicides in total. It is probably a better comparison than car deaths.
eli 4y ago
Huh? I can't even tell if you're arguing for the rights of gun owners or the rights of social media companies or the rights of citizens to say questionable things online. But if your argument hinges on "mass shootings aren't a big deal" than let's agree to disagree.

dane-pgp 4y ago

To be fair, there are already a lot of regulations about who can drive a car (on public roads) and which sorts of cars can be used. Be careful that you're not inadvertently asking for social media to be regulated more like cars. Fortunately, however, there are plenty of countries that have fewer mass shootings and arguably better protection of civil liberties than the US, so they might provide some inspiration.

ceejayoz 4y ago

> How many people die from mass shootings per year? Now compare that to the number of people that die in car accidents. I mean, to take my car out in public, I'm required to have a license, registration, inspection, various safety devices, and follow a variety of usage rules.

HideousKojima 4y ago
You can still buy or build a car without any of that for use on your own property or other private places that allow it, but there's no practical barrier to you taking it out on public roads other than the risk of being pulled over and ticketed.
- ceejayoz 4y ago
  Sure. Same's true for a gun. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Privately_made_firearm https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Privately_made_firearm
throwaway0a5e 4y ago
Unless "do whatever you want on private property and do a pretty wide range of things in public with a trivially easy to get license" is your policy goal you probably don't want to bring up the car comparison.
- ceejayoz 4y ago
  Why? “Trivially easy to get license” would be an improvement here.
  - throwaway0a5e 4y ago
    We already generally subject firearms stuff to licensing if you want to have your armaments with you in public. Some states have basically none. Some states have onerous regulation. We'll split the difference. Across the whole nation we have a fairly substantial set of restrictions on what you can and can't own, regardless of whether or not you only ever use it on private property (there are no such restrictions for cars). So the net effect would be mostly no change in public and a massive net loosening of restrictions in private. Personally I'm fine with this. But I think you'll probably be clamoring to have the status qou back as soon as your local extremists start posting youtube videos of 14yos firing mortars at their summer BBQ.
salawat 4y ago
All of that came out of law enforcement whining that cars made pursuits and catching criminals too difficult back in the day, turning one of the most fundamental freedoms, (freedom to locomote) into a government gated privilege. Laying the foundation for an eventual effective surveillance state. Not buying it.
- ceejayoz 4y ago
  The first US states to require licenses were in 1903. Long before police pursuits were much of a thing. The airbag requirements certainly have nothing to do with it, either.
sixQuarks 4y ago
Yes, but there are still over 40,000 deaths per year in car accidents in the US alone. If car accident deaths had the same emotional reaction as mass shootings, people would demand the government setup checkpoints at every intersection to "better monitor the drivers"

root_axis 4y ago

What is the point of this arbitrary comparison? Yes, there are more automotive deaths than mass shooting deaths, so what? Are you trying to say mass shootings are no big deal because car accidents kill more people or do you have some kind of principled stance against government investigations? > Government always uses emotional tragedies to grab authoritarian power Is that what you think is happening here? If so, could you please elaborate on why you think this?

sixQuarks 4y ago
I was replying to this specific part: * "We should better monitor these sites" might be an entirely valid conclusion.* No, we should not have to monitor sites for the minuscule chance that a psychopath is planning a mass shooting. Senators are already pushing this type of surveillance on social media, it's a matter of time before this type of surveillance is used against thought crimes, and people that don't agree with the establishment.

rightbyte 4y ago

446 people were killed in mass shootings in the US in 2020. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mass_shootings_in_the_United_States_in_2020 https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mass_shootings_in_th... 19 384 homicides in total. It is probably a better comparison than car deaths.

eli 4y ago

Huh? I can't even tell if you're arguing for the rights of gun owners or the rights of social media companies or the rights of citizens to say questionable things online. But if your argument hinges on "mass shootings aren't a big deal" than let's agree to disagree.