15 ms·

As a foreigner, I do not see it as productive to seek any explanation or expect any reaction when yet another news story like this comes along. It's clear that

• tomrod 4y ago
  Way more than half don't want to live like this. We live in a broken system dominated by a minority of states.
  • chmod600 4y ago
  • rubyist5eva 4y ago
    "why doesn't my country just let me stomp all over the rights of people that don't want to live like me"
• EugeneOZ 4y ago
  As a foreigner, I have an impression that americans can buy a gun at 18, but cun buy a cigarette at 21. Maybe I’m wrong, but still... Call me an “old-timer” but I do think you could use better psychological tests before letting them buy a gun.
  • bifrost 4y ago
    Its because buying a gun is a civil right. Smoking is not. That said, the 21yo requirement may be unconstitutional as well.
    • tomrod 4y ago
      I've noticed your eight comments in this thread to date are fairly declarative but aren't well founded or sourced, simply assertions and often appear to be incorrect as responding comments have shown. Clearly, you and I both support the second amendment. However, we should recognize when our support of certain associate claims aren't well founded. Bearing arms and being part of a well-regulated militia are American civil rights granted by the Bill of Rights. Purchasing those arms isn't a civil right.[0] [0] https://www.ojp.gov/ncjrs/virtual-library/abstracts/second-amendment-does-not-guarantee-right-own-gun-gun-control-p-99 https://www.ojp.gov/ncjrs/virtual-library/abstracts/second-a...
      • zozin 4y ago
        Oh wise HN poster waving away hundreds of years of jurisprudence and constitutional interpretation with one link!
        • tomrod 4y ago
          Former Supreme Court justice waving the hands even!
          • zozin 4y ago
            Get five to agree and get back to me ;-)
            • tomrod 4y ago
              Got dozens of countries already light years ahead on this and they are operating perfectly fine without loads of gun violence despite similar rates of mental health issues.
              • throwaway09223 4y ago
                Those other countries do not have similar rates of mental health issues, or similar social situations at all. If you ignore guns entirely, the US still stands out from other countries with an extraordinarily high rate of non-gun violence. It's more accurate to say that the US has a violence problem in general. If you're truly interested in solving the violence problem, perhaps examine why the US is such a statistical outlier. And also, perhaps, why other countries like Switzerland have such different outcomes while still having extremely high rates of private gun ownership.
                • tomrod 4y ago
                  Topic today isn't boiling the ocean. Gun violence has two elements, access to guns and motivation. Working on either and both are key.
    • yardstick 4y ago
      What limits, if any, does the 2nd amendment or the rest of the constitution place on the type of arms? Eg should you be allowed to use - pistols? - rifles? - machine guns? - explosive / armour piercing bullets? - grenades? - nuclear bombs? - chemical weapons? - biological weapons? Basically I’m asking where is the line drawn. Because I don’t think the constitution sets such limits, no distinction for weapons of mass destruction, etc yet the country has found ways to limit people holding chemical weapons and more serious ordinance.
      • pokeymcsnatch 4y ago
        My thoughts on this... Considering the purpose and context of the 2nd, it essentially protects a contemporary citizen-soldier's "kit". The stuff he/she needs to join up in common defense with their community, which includes survival gear, protective gear, and of course, a weapon. Today's citizen-soldier would carry an AR-15 or variant. If there's one modern gun protected by the 2nd, that's the one.
        • runnerup 4y ago
          Still very fuzzy. Javelin missiles? Claymores? C4? Anti-personnel mines? Armored infantry transport vehicles with mounted machine gun? Armored infantry transport vehicles with small diameter turreted cannon? Counter-measures for their personal aircraft?
          • yardstick 4y ago
            All very appropriate for Ukrainian civilians and military right now, fighting for their lives.
            • quickthrower2 4y ago
              At war you could just allow anyone to declare they are a soldier. They even had (have?) an international visa for anyone wanting to come and fight.
          • 4y ago
    • pjc50 4y ago
      > buying a gun is a civil right Yeah, this is the point of insanity; so long as people continue to believe this, there will be a school shooting in the US every few weeks. That's what people mean by "the US has chosen this".
      • MockObject 4y ago
        Except, we've believed this for generations, but the mass shooting epidemic is rather new.
    • mrguyorama 4y ago
      The 2nd amendment does not actually say anything about purchasing. It could be 100 % satisfied with all sorts of kooky schemes that meet the letter of the law.
      • rubyist5eva 4y ago
        It's covered under the "shall not be infringed" part.
  • chmod600 4y ago
    A 16 year old was effectively an adult not so long ago. Today, an 18 year old is a child. We should just move the age of majority to 24 or so. Guns and voting would start there. Vices and contracts would be some sliding scale.
    • LoveGracePeace 4y ago
      Agree. In the US today... A 16 year old can be licenced to drive a car which is a potentially deadly killing machine. A 17 year old can join the US Military today, use firearms, fight and die for their country and if needed; kill their own countrymen if politicians deem some citizens are a threat. An 18 year old can vote and determine who should run the country then they go back to watching TickTok 24/7. A 17 year old cannot have a beer. There is something wrong with all of that, today driving a car, voting and entering the military should all be the age that is required to legally buy a beer.
    • EugeneOZ 4y ago
      24th birthday doesn't make a person wise automatically. Psychological tests are needed for gun buyers.
      • chmod600 4y ago
        The perfect is the enemy of the good. 24 is 6 extra years of maturing. That will save a lot of lives (not just mass shootings, but gang violence and suicides). And 24 better reflects reality in terms of adulthood. Not only that, but it's palatable politically. As long as it goes with voting age and other rights, then gun owners are more likely to go along with it. Make some exceptions that work for young hunters, and people won't feel left out. If anything, it's likely to see pushback from the left because they want lots of people voting from a young age. But I don't think the overall electoral decisions will be any worse by making people wait 6 more years. The left will just adapt and move on (e.g. more focus on struggling families and less on cultural/identity issues).
      • pengaru 4y ago
        25 is widely accepted as approximately the age for full brain development, on average. It's part of why car insurance rates tend to drop around 25.
• mulmen 4y ago
  As an American I hope when your country suffers a tragedy people don't go out of their way to tell you it doesn't matter to them.
  • monkeybutton 4y ago
    As a non-American this statement is hilarious.
    • mulmen 4y ago
      I don't see anything funny about it. What am I missing?
      • Aeolun 4y ago
        1 mass killing is a tragedy, 100 mass killings per year is a statistic. Are you truly telling us to care about it every time it happens when the Americans themselves clearly don’t?
        • mulmen 4y ago
          As an American I care about this. As a human I care about this. I'm surprised I have to say that. I'm not asking you to care about anything. I don't actually care what you think or care about to be honest. But I would hope that jonp888 or you or anyone aren't told their tragedy doesn't matter or that it happens because they don't care themselves.
          • grecy 4y ago
            America and Americans have demonstrably done absolutely nothing for decades about what an outsider sees as a severe problem that must be fixed at all costs. If America and Americans are not doing anything to fix the problem, they clearly can't think it's much of a problem.
            • 4y ago
• School-Cotton 4y ago
  > It's clear that this is the way Americans wish to live That’s not clear at all. The US has more anti-gun-violence activists than anywhere else in the world. There is some amount of friction, different in each country but not zero anywhere, between “what people want” and “what is the law”. Do you think North Koreans prefer living under a corrupt dictatorship? Why don’t they just make the dictatorship illegal? That’s an extreme example of course: the US political system is closer to European-style proportional parliamentary systems than it is to North Korea, but it’s still very different from them, and in many meaningful ways is not actually a democracy.
  • Aeolun 4y ago
    If enough people actually cared about this, then you’d have people marching on the capitol, like after a certain president was not re-elected. If people haven’t gotten motivated enough after literally decades of this shit, I find it really hard to blame the law.
    • School-Cotton 4y ago
      > If enough people actually cared about this, then you’d have people marching on the capitol, like after a certain president was not re-elected. People do care, and they do protest and march, and like most protests anywhere it does not change anything. Sorry but you seem to have a very naive view of the effectiveness of protests. By the way, the pro-Trump protests didn’t achieve anything either (other than furthering the US’s slide into bitter ultra-partisan division and total erosion of trust in institutions). Notably, they did not successfully enable Trump to remain president. So what is your point?
    • LoveGracePeace 4y ago
      • chrischen 4y ago
        That amendment was written back when a gun was more powerful than words or information, and when gun ownership was more prevalent and necessary. In our modern day information, speech, and and privacy are the guns that ensure rights are not stomped on. It’s no longer the wild wild west. To think that rules written hundreds of years ago never need to be changed is spitting in the face of our founders who realized that the process of amendments are necessary because things change. The irony is that people are defending the second amendment by claiming it cannot be amended.
• Gatsky 4y ago
  I have learned that some Americans consider it crucial to arm themselves in case there is a tyrannical government in the future. This seems nuts to almost everyone else in a first world country, and probably many other Americans. But these people, who are not in fact nuts or cretinous, actually believe this and consider it of paramount importance. In one sense, the point can't be argued. My view: If the US population really wants to do something school shootings in the near term, then the physical layout of schools should be changed so that someone can't just walk in and shoot children. Does this make school look and feel like a dystopian prison? Yes. But that's the price of freedom, which probably shouldn't be born by dead primary school children. This strikes me as the only politically feasible solution right now. Gun regulation seems likely to help and is a fairly logical solution, but too many people seem allergic to it, and there are already so many unregistered firearms out there. While we are dreaming, reshaping society so everyone is kinder and less likely to shoot each other is also likely to help.
  • maccolgan 4y ago
    >tyrannical government in the future. This seems nuts to almost everyone else in a first world country You don't live in a tyrannical government?
  • hikingsimulator 4y ago
    • ekam 4y ago
      • hikingsimulator 4y ago
        Your retort is just an obfuscated what-aboutism. A cursory glance at incarceration rates, deficit in access to healthcare, education, etc. enforced by supposedly colorblind legislation, the whole defended by a police that has roots in labor repression and racial policing does not help your position. If the USofA really are one of the least racist countries on earth, it is more a damning condemnation of the world than a glowing review of this country.
• lliamander 4y ago
  I don't think the opinion of someone with no skin in the game, who only gets their information from the news, and doesn't know much about firearms to be worth all that much.