7 ms·

Are there no Bullies in say, the United Kingdom? The big difference between UK and USA is the number of guns we have in our country compared to theirs. We prob

Are there no Bullies in say, the United Kingdom? The big difference between UK and USA is the number of guns we have in our country compared to theirs. We probably can't stop bullying, but we actually can do something about the number of guns in our country.

jka 4y ago
Supporting dragontamer's claim regarding number of firearms: According to a report[1] by Small Arms Survey in 2017, there were an estimated 120 civilian firmarms per 100 people in the USA: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Estimated_number_of_civilian_guns_per_capita_by_country https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Estimated_number_of_civilian_g... That's almost twice as many as the next-closest nation. [1] - https://web.archive.org/web/20180620231909/http://www.smallarmssurvey.org/fileadmin/docs/T-Briefing-Papers/SAS-BP-Civilian-Firearms-Numbers.pdf https://web.archive.org/web/20180620231909/http://www.smalla...
- freediver 4y ago
  This argument would be obvious if USA had say twice the number of school shootings as the next-closes nation but it has ~36x [1] What gives? https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/school-shootings-by-country https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/school-sh...
  - jka 4y ago
    A theory: the number of firearms (which translates into how accessible they are) isn't a linear scaling factor in the problem. Comparative population could be relevant, although also doesn't explain the statistics you reference. To try to prove/disprove the argument: has the prevalence (or nature) of bullying changed?
  - kelseyfrog 4y ago
    That would be true if we assume the effect is linear, but why should it be? Is there evidence of linearity?
    - chroma 4y ago
      If the relationship were superlinear, then we'd expect to see much higher rates of mass shootings in places like Montana or Wyoming (where >60% of households have guns) and lower rates in California (where ~20% of households have guns). This does not seem to be the case.
      - jka 4y ago
        There is a correlation chart[1] of gun ownership and gun deaths per state for 2013 in this article: https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2015/07/gun-owners-study-one-in-three/ https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2015/07/gun-owners-stud... (correlation does not explain causation, but it may help to guide analysis) [1] - https://web.archive.org/web/20211204010352/https://www.motherjones.com/wp-content/uploads/gun-ownership-vs-gun-deaths_2.png https://web.archive.org/web/20211204010352/https://www.mothe...
        chroma 4y ago
        That is gun deaths, not gun homicides or mass shootings. Around 2/3rds of gun deaths are suicides. A suicidal person will choose the most effective and painless method available to them, so if they have a gun around, they'll use it. This is a totally different problem than gun violence, but many activists will conflate the two.
        dragontamer 4y ago
        Its not "conflation". Its recognition that background-checks, and delays, should reduce gun-violence AND cut back on suicides.
        Ichthypresbyter 4y ago
        I'm not sure how much of an effect they would have on suicides. This may just be my stereotypical mental image, but I suspect that a lot of gun suicide victims have owned the gun in question for a long time, in which case a waiting period wouldn't help any more than a waiting period to buy a car would stop people driving off bridges. Are there any numbers on how many people commit suicide with guns they bought in the last 6 months of their life?
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
AnimalMuppet 4y ago
I'm pretty sure there are bullies in Serbia, too, and fraught home conditions. And there are the guns. What's missing? onesafari said: > The root cause may be bullying combined with the media contagion effect. You need the bullying (or other oppressive social condition) and the media contagion. And, as you say, you need the massive amounts of guns. > but we actually can do something about the number of guns in our country. It is not clear to me that your statement is true. Given the Second Amendment, given the Supreme Court (and, in particular, the current makeup of the Supreme Court), I'm not sure what can be done. If you see a path, we'd all love to see the plan...
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- Auracle 4y ago
  Nobody ever talks about restricting the first amendment instead of the second, but it would be just as effective for mass shootings. But we probably wouldn’t even need to restrict it. If the president and other politicians shamed every media company that named the shooter when this happens we could probably make some progress.
Zak 4y ago
> we actually can do something about the number of guns in our country Can we? AnimalMuppet already mentioned the legal barriers, but there's another issue: the US is currently suffering from extreme political polarization which has already led to an insurrection. How do you think that would interact with an attempt at mass confiscation[0] of guns? I fear such a policy any time in the near future would spark a civil war, leading to many times more deaths than all the school shootings added together. [0] I read your post as implying mass confiscation. Simply restricting the purchase of new guns would take many decades to significantly reduce the number of guns in circulation.
- panarky 4y ago
  > Can we? We can't solve this problem because we're all talking about highly theoretical and utopian solutions that don't account for actually existing realities. The left says "no guns". The right says "more guns". The US constitution says "the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." Yes, there's a preface about a well regulated militia, and yes, people were using muskets when it was written, but the Supreme Court has ruled that this confers an individual right to possess modern firearms. And the Supreme Court is even more right-wing now, and likely to force blue states to loosen their gun laws to look more like red states. So maybe we'd have a more productive conversation if we talked about what's possible in the actually existing United States instead of dreaming about Australia's successes, because there's zero probability that we'll be able to learn from Australia.
  - dragontamer 4y ago
    > The left says "no guns". The right says "more guns". The left actually says "more background checks", though there are an unreasonable group that goes for absolutely no guns. There's also the questions about what to do with aftermarket triggers that allow for burst-firing or even fully-automatic firing, which are legal right now (and were used in the Las Vegas mass shooting attack). Banning certain items (ex: large-capacity magazines, trigger-mods, bump-stocks and the like) would still be an improvement.
    - 4y ago
cryptodan 4y ago
I was bullied and still am. I have used and owned guns since I was 4. I haven't once thought about killing another person, and I too suffered from a speech impediment and didn't have it easy in school. The difference between me and these mass shooters is that I was told to use that as strengths and to use it to make myself better. I have and successfully done so. The mass shooters as of late feel like this is the only way to settle their rage and anger. It's rather sad. The issue isn't guns the issue is the crumbling family and tge degradation of society. We humans are nothing but animals down to the core. If a person wants to kill they will find a way. Another issue in the USA is the lacking mental Healthcare that other nations have. Many are afraid to seek mental health help because of the stigma of looking weak, much like men not reporting rape or sexual assault that they experience. Also couple that with covid19 lockdowns and that gives these at risk people lots of time to think, plan, and execute. At this time its far to late for them. As a result you get more mass shootings.
- freediver 4y ago
  Thanks for sharing that, sorry to hear the situation but really interesting thoughts. In your opinion what lead to the crumbling of the institution of family, that did not happen in other countries?
  - IG_Semmelweiss 4y ago
    Not parent, but my thoughts: - Decline of religion/spirituality is more pronounced in usa. - More dual working parent homes (due to free labor markets). I also suspect that while real incomes have risen, actual disposable income has decreased, which pressures households into dual working arrangements. This means less time invested by parents in kids. - institutional rot of public education . As some poster said, school bureaucracy is now defacto enabler of bullying - by doing nothing when observed... and punishing teachers that actually try. - the internet has cracked the authority of social groups, with more time spent online and people more fractured among niche interests. This means less oversight and more activities happening without a concerted response by the group
    - 4y ago
soneil 4y ago
I grew up in the UK, before I moved to the US. In the UK, I was taught that a solid punch was the solution to bullying. I fear the issue in the US is just a very disturbing take on a solid punch. You're relentlessly taught through film and media that a good guy with a gun, probably crawling through an air duct, is that solid punch. I was taught to just hit them. In the face. On the nose. Even if you lose, just hit them. I fear this message has lost something in translation.
- denimnerd42 4y ago
  With zero tolerance policies a punch will get you a two week suspension on your "permanent" school record while the bully will get a day or nothing.
  - dfee 4y ago
    Yeah, but (pardon my French) who the fuck cares? Straight-A valedictorian reporting in. I’d’ve advised middle school me that this (a punch to the nose) couldn’t be a worse resolution. With crap middle school administration, the bullied are ending up in detention (or worse) while the provocateurs are getting away without repercussion.
    - trevcanhuman 4y ago
      I agree. Yet part of the problem is that your future kinda depends on it. You could be cataloged as having 'mental issues' for punching a guy in the face, even if it was for self defense. But yeah, I guess your point still stands since we've lost our sense of what's right and standing up for ourselves. The "Fine, I'll do it myself" meme would definitely apply here.
    - denimnerd42 4y ago
      My middle school grades and teacher recommendations got me into an elite high school. If I had thrown punches at bullies, got suspended, missed test, etc.. I wouldn't have had that opportunity. Most people's middle school grades are probably useless but I dunno maybe they get them into a higher track in 9th grade like AP courses and stuff vs remedial work.
marcosdumay 4y ago
> Are there no Bullies in say, the United Kingdom? Quite possibly, not much. It's something that varies a lot from one culture to another, and you need a lot of it, unchecked for years to destroy a person.

jka 4y ago

Supporting dragontamer's claim regarding number of firearms: According to a report[1] by Small Arms Survey in 2017, there were an estimated 120 civilian firmarms per 100 people in the USA: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Estimated_number_of_civilian_guns_per_capita_by_country https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Estimated_number_of_civilian_g... That's almost twice as many as the next-closest nation. [1] - https://web.archive.org/web/20180620231909/http://www.smallarmssurvey.org/fileadmin/docs/T-Briefing-Papers/SAS-BP-Civilian-Firearms-Numbers.pdf https://web.archive.org/web/20180620231909/http://www.smalla...

freediver 4y ago
This argument would be obvious if USA had say twice the number of school shootings as the next-closes nation but it has ~36x [1] What gives? https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/school-shootings-by-country https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/school-sh...
- jka 4y ago
  A theory: the number of firearms (which translates into how accessible they are) isn't a linear scaling factor in the problem. Comparative population could be relevant, although also doesn't explain the statistics you reference. To try to prove/disprove the argument: has the prevalence (or nature) of bullying changed?
- kelseyfrog 4y ago
  That would be true if we assume the effect is linear, but why should it be? Is there evidence of linearity?
  - chroma 4y ago
    If the relationship were superlinear, then we'd expect to see much higher rates of mass shootings in places like Montana or Wyoming (where >60% of households have guns) and lower rates in California (where ~20% of households have guns). This does not seem to be the case.
    - jka 4y ago
      There is a correlation chart[1] of gun ownership and gun deaths per state for 2013 in this article: https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2015/07/gun-owners-study-one-in-three/ https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2015/07/gun-owners-stud... (correlation does not explain causation, but it may help to guide analysis) [1] - https://web.archive.org/web/20211204010352/https://www.motherjones.com/wp-content/uploads/gun-ownership-vs-gun-deaths_2.png https://web.archive.org/web/20211204010352/https://www.mothe...
      - chroma 4y ago
        That is gun deaths, not gun homicides or mass shootings. Around 2/3rds of gun deaths are suicides. A suicidal person will choose the most effective and painless method available to them, so if they have a gun around, they'll use it. This is a totally different problem than gun violence, but many activists will conflate the two.
        dragontamer 4y ago
        Its not "conflation". Its recognition that background-checks, and delays, should reduce gun-violence AND cut back on suicides.
        Ichthypresbyter 4y ago
        I'm not sure how much of an effect they would have on suicides. This may just be my stereotypical mental image, but I suspect that a lot of gun suicide victims have owned the gun in question for a long time, in which case a waiting period wouldn't help any more than a waiting period to buy a car would stop people driving off bridges. Are there any numbers on how many people commit suicide with guns they bought in the last 6 months of their life?

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

AnimalMuppet 4y ago

I'm pretty sure there are bullies in Serbia, too, and fraught home conditions. And there are the guns. What's missing? onesafari said: > The root cause may be bullying combined with the media contagion effect. You need the bullying (or other oppressive social condition) and the media contagion. And, as you say, you need the massive amounts of guns. > but we actually can do something about the number of guns in our country. It is not clear to me that your statement is true. Given the Second Amendment, given the Supreme Court (and, in particular, the current makeup of the Supreme Court), I'm not sure what can be done. If you see a path, we'd all love to see the plan...

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
Auracle 4y ago
Nobody ever talks about restricting the first amendment instead of the second, but it would be just as effective for mass shootings. But we probably wouldn’t even need to restrict it. If the president and other politicians shamed every media company that named the shooter when this happens we could probably make some progress.

Zak 4y ago

> we actually can do something about the number of guns in our country Can we? AnimalMuppet already mentioned the legal barriers, but there's another issue: the US is currently suffering from extreme political polarization which has already led to an insurrection. How do you think that would interact with an attempt at mass confiscation[0] of guns? I fear such a policy any time in the near future would spark a civil war, leading to many times more deaths than all the school shootings added together. [0] I read your post as implying mass confiscation. Simply restricting the purchase of new guns would take many decades to significantly reduce the number of guns in circulation.

panarky 4y ago
> Can we? We can't solve this problem because we're all talking about highly theoretical and utopian solutions that don't account for actually existing realities. The left says "no guns". The right says "more guns". The US constitution says "the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." Yes, there's a preface about a well regulated militia, and yes, people were using muskets when it was written, but the Supreme Court has ruled that this confers an individual right to possess modern firearms. And the Supreme Court is even more right-wing now, and likely to force blue states to loosen their gun laws to look more like red states. So maybe we'd have a more productive conversation if we talked about what's possible in the actually existing United States instead of dreaming about Australia's successes, because there's zero probability that we'll be able to learn from Australia.
- dragontamer 4y ago
  > The left says "no guns". The right says "more guns". The left actually says "more background checks", though there are an unreasonable group that goes for absolutely no guns. There's also the questions about what to do with aftermarket triggers that allow for burst-firing or even fully-automatic firing, which are legal right now (and were used in the Las Vegas mass shooting attack). Banning certain items (ex: large-capacity magazines, trigger-mods, bump-stocks and the like) would still be an improvement.
  - 4y ago

cryptodan 4y ago

I was bullied and still am. I have used and owned guns since I was 4. I haven't once thought about killing another person, and I too suffered from a speech impediment and didn't have it easy in school. The difference between me and these mass shooters is that I was told to use that as strengths and to use it to make myself better. I have and successfully done so. The mass shooters as of late feel like this is the only way to settle their rage and anger. It's rather sad. The issue isn't guns the issue is the crumbling family and tge degradation of society. We humans are nothing but animals down to the core. If a person wants to kill they will find a way. Another issue in the USA is the lacking mental Healthcare that other nations have. Many are afraid to seek mental health help because of the stigma of looking weak, much like men not reporting rape or sexual assault that they experience. Also couple that with covid19 lockdowns and that gives these at risk people lots of time to think, plan, and execute. At this time its far to late for them. As a result you get more mass shootings.

freediver 4y ago
Thanks for sharing that, sorry to hear the situation but really interesting thoughts. In your opinion what lead to the crumbling of the institution of family, that did not happen in other countries?
- IG_Semmelweiss 4y ago
  Not parent, but my thoughts: - Decline of religion/spirituality is more pronounced in usa. - More dual working parent homes (due to free labor markets). I also suspect that while real incomes have risen, actual disposable income has decreased, which pressures households into dual working arrangements. This means less time invested by parents in kids. - institutional rot of public education . As some poster said, school bureaucracy is now defacto enabler of bullying - by doing nothing when observed... and punishing teachers that actually try. - the internet has cracked the authority of social groups, with more time spent online and people more fractured among niche interests. This means less oversight and more activities happening without a concerted response by the group
  - 4y ago

soneil 4y ago

I grew up in the UK, before I moved to the US. In the UK, I was taught that a solid punch was the solution to bullying. I fear the issue in the US is just a very disturbing take on a solid punch. You're relentlessly taught through film and media that a good guy with a gun, probably crawling through an air duct, is that solid punch. I was taught to just hit them. In the face. On the nose. Even if you lose, just hit them. I fear this message has lost something in translation.

denimnerd42 4y ago
With zero tolerance policies a punch will get you a two week suspension on your "permanent" school record while the bully will get a day or nothing.
- dfee 4y ago
  Yeah, but (pardon my French) who the fuck cares? Straight-A valedictorian reporting in. I’d’ve advised middle school me that this (a punch to the nose) couldn’t be a worse resolution. With crap middle school administration, the bullied are ending up in detention (or worse) while the provocateurs are getting away without repercussion.
  - trevcanhuman 4y ago
    I agree. Yet part of the problem is that your future kinda depends on it. You could be cataloged as having 'mental issues' for punching a guy in the face, even if it was for self defense. But yeah, I guess your point still stands since we've lost our sense of what's right and standing up for ourselves. The "Fine, I'll do it myself" meme would definitely apply here.
  - denimnerd42 4y ago
    My middle school grades and teacher recommendations got me into an elite high school. If I had thrown punches at bullies, got suspended, missed test, etc.. I wouldn't have had that opportunity. Most people's middle school grades are probably useless but I dunno maybe they get them into a higher track in 9th grade like AP courses and stuff vs remedial work.

marcosdumay 4y ago

> Are there no Bullies in say, the United Kingdom? Quite possibly, not much. It's something that varies a lot from one culture to another, and you need a lot of it, unchecked for years to destroy a person.