4 ms·

> The problem is so obviously guns The guns haven't changed in 60 years, and in fact regulations have increased across the board on both purchasing and manufac

> The problem is so obviously guns The guns haven't changed in 60 years, and in fact regulations have increased across the board on both purchasing and manufacturing. But, let's say it is "so obviously" the guns- how is "what is the solution" some kind of naive or ignorant question? Do you know the solution?

throw0101a 4y ago
> The guns haven't changed in 60 years, and in fact regulations have increased across the board on both purchasing and manufacturing. Carry regulations have decreased as evidenced in this animated map: * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Right_to_Carry,_timeline.gif https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Right_to_Carry,_timeline.... * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_concealed_carry_in_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_concealed_carry_in_... * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Concealed_carry_in_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Concealed_carry_in_the_United_... In 1986 there were 16 no-issue states (including Texas(!)); in 2022 there are zero. One unrestricted carry state in 1986, 21 in 2022.
- maxerickson 4y ago
  The issuance of legal carry permits for concealed weapons isn't really relevant to a discussion about illegal mass violence that is largely carried out with long rifles. Of course overall gun violence is dominated by pistols (but I wouldn't expect the people using pistols to commit illegal violence to be overly worried with carry permits).
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
- pokeymcsnatch 4y ago
  Carry regulations specifically have loosened. CHL holders are statistically model citizens. They commit significantly less violent crimes than the general public, and significantly less than even trained police officers. Regulations on purchasing have increased drastically over the last 60 years. It's harder to buy a gun now than it ever has been in this country.
epgui 4y ago
Guns in the US are fetishized, and the culture around guns is certainly something that can evolve over time even if guns stay largely the same (which they haven't really, but I will grant you this for the sake of argument).
- pokeymcsnatch 4y ago
  > Guns in the US are fetishized I see this thrown around all the time, right before the term "ammosexual" comes out and right along with the allegations of compensating for dick size. My counter-ancedote is that I haven't seen it, honestly. Guns are a hobby for some people, and I imagine that's been the same forever, right? Maybe a growing hobby, but to call it fetishization dismisses the vast vast majority of people who just like to peacefully enjoy their interests. Also... what's changed with guns in that time frame? I wasn't trying to be dishonest in saying that. Modern ARs don't have any significant difference from the original Armalite model. Same with AK variants. Non-autoloaders haven't changed in well over 100 years.
  - epgui 4y ago
    > My counter-ancedote is that I haven't seen it I don't know your background, but for my part... I live in Canada, in a province that enjoys fishing and hunting (a great part of which is for leisure). Notwithstanding, the fetishization of guns I observe from the US is deeply rooted: it's not so much a sexual thing (though I have no doubt that in some cases it could be) as it is an identity thing. (For an example of how the word "fetish" applies to guns in American culture, see [1] or [2].) Enshrined in the very constitution, it defines what it is to live in America. Politicians go on TV and passionately advance every argument, meritorious or malicious, that they can against gun regulation. Civil discourse around guns lacks nuance and is extremely dogmatic. The loud minority that worships their guns is particularly loud. "Regular people" are obviously more numerous and less noticeable, and my criticism of gun fetishization should not be confounded with denial of their existence or numerical superiority. Still, the overton window in the US seems to be very accommodative to people with more guns than IQ points, and any proposed solutions to try and protect the vulnerable from violence, or ameliorate the situation, are met with outrage. Generously speaking, the US (and the American sense of identity) has seriously struggled to transition from a society that broadly depends on guns to function, into a more specialized and developed society. --- > What's changed with guns in that time frame? Frankly, I don't know enough about gun design and technology to give your question the treatment it deserves or to give a good answer. --- [1] https://www.nature.com/articles/s41599-019-0323-9 https://www.nature.com/articles/s41599-019-0323-9 [2] https://sci-hub.hkvisa.net/10.1007/978-3-319-33723-4_2 https://sci-hub.hkvisa.net/10.1007/978-3-319-33723-4_2
Bud 4y ago
Regulations have not "increased across the board". Obviously. We had an assault weapons ban in the US, for a while, under Clinton. It worked. We should still have it. The solution is to ban assault weapons, outright, and then institute strict background checks, without any loopholes. The vast majority of the public supports this. Was that clear enough? Yes, I do know the solution.
- pokeymcsnatch 4y ago
  There's 0 evidence the 94 ban had any effect. Violent crime was already on a downward tend, and when the ban sunsetted 16 years ago, that downward trend continued until the last 2 years. There's several links just in this comment section that backs that up. "Assault weapon" is a political term with no solid definition. If you mean banning semi-automatic guns, that's at least a meaningful proposal. Again though- this class of weapons have been around and readily accessible for over 100 years. Mass shootings are a modern problem. Why would banning them now be the answer? Until the Orlando shooting, the VT shooting, committed with two handguns and 10 round magazines, was the deadliest in US history. Charles Whitman killed 14 people with a bolt action rifle from the UT bell tower. I'm not saying these disprove your assault weapons ban solution, but it's certainly not as straightforward as you're making it out to be.

throw0101a 4y ago

> The guns haven't changed in 60 years, and in fact regulations have increased across the board on both purchasing and manufacturing. Carry regulations have decreased as evidenced in this animated map: * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Right_to_Carry,_timeline.gif https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Right_to_Carry,_timeline.... * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_concealed_carry_in_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_concealed_carry_in_... * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Concealed_carry_in_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Concealed_carry_in_the_United_... In 1986 there were 16 no-issue states (including Texas(!)); in 2022 there are zero. One unrestricted carry state in 1986, 21 in 2022.

maxerickson 4y ago
The issuance of legal carry permits for concealed weapons isn't really relevant to a discussion about illegal mass violence that is largely carried out with long rifles. Of course overall gun violence is dominated by pistols (but I wouldn't expect the people using pistols to commit illegal violence to be overly worried with carry permits).
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
pokeymcsnatch 4y ago
Carry regulations specifically have loosened. CHL holders are statistically model citizens. They commit significantly less violent crimes than the general public, and significantly less than even trained police officers. Regulations on purchasing have increased drastically over the last 60 years. It's harder to buy a gun now than it ever has been in this country.

epgui 4y ago

Guns in the US are fetishized, and the culture around guns is certainly something that can evolve over time even if guns stay largely the same (which they haven't really, but I will grant you this for the sake of argument).

pokeymcsnatch 4y ago
> Guns in the US are fetishized I see this thrown around all the time, right before the term "ammosexual" comes out and right along with the allegations of compensating for dick size. My counter-ancedote is that I haven't seen it, honestly. Guns are a hobby for some people, and I imagine that's been the same forever, right? Maybe a growing hobby, but to call it fetishization dismisses the vast vast majority of people who just like to peacefully enjoy their interests. Also... what's changed with guns in that time frame? I wasn't trying to be dishonest in saying that. Modern ARs don't have any significant difference from the original Armalite model. Same with AK variants. Non-autoloaders haven't changed in well over 100 years.
- epgui 4y ago
  > My counter-ancedote is that I haven't seen it I don't know your background, but for my part... I live in Canada, in a province that enjoys fishing and hunting (a great part of which is for leisure). Notwithstanding, the fetishization of guns I observe from the US is deeply rooted: it's not so much a sexual thing (though I have no doubt that in some cases it could be) as it is an identity thing. (For an example of how the word "fetish" applies to guns in American culture, see [1] or [2].) Enshrined in the very constitution, it defines what it is to live in America. Politicians go on TV and passionately advance every argument, meritorious or malicious, that they can against gun regulation. Civil discourse around guns lacks nuance and is extremely dogmatic. The loud minority that worships their guns is particularly loud. "Regular people" are obviously more numerous and less noticeable, and my criticism of gun fetishization should not be confounded with denial of their existence or numerical superiority. Still, the overton window in the US seems to be very accommodative to people with more guns than IQ points, and any proposed solutions to try and protect the vulnerable from violence, or ameliorate the situation, are met with outrage. Generously speaking, the US (and the American sense of identity) has seriously struggled to transition from a society that broadly depends on guns to function, into a more specialized and developed society. --- > What's changed with guns in that time frame? Frankly, I don't know enough about gun design and technology to give your question the treatment it deserves or to give a good answer. --- [1] https://www.nature.com/articles/s41599-019-0323-9 https://www.nature.com/articles/s41599-019-0323-9 [2] https://sci-hub.hkvisa.net/10.1007/978-3-319-33723-4_2 https://sci-hub.hkvisa.net/10.1007/978-3-319-33723-4_2

Bud 4y ago

Regulations have not "increased across the board". Obviously. We had an assault weapons ban in the US, for a while, under Clinton. It worked. We should still have it. The solution is to ban assault weapons, outright, and then institute strict background checks, without any loopholes. The vast majority of the public supports this. Was that clear enough? Yes, I do know the solution.

pokeymcsnatch 4y ago
There's 0 evidence the 94 ban had any effect. Violent crime was already on a downward tend, and when the ban sunsetted 16 years ago, that downward trend continued until the last 2 years. There's several links just in this comment section that backs that up. "Assault weapon" is a political term with no solid definition. If you mean banning semi-automatic guns, that's at least a meaningful proposal. Again though- this class of weapons have been around and readily accessible for over 100 years. Mass shootings are a modern problem. Why would banning them now be the answer? Until the Orlando shooting, the VT shooting, committed with two handguns and 10 round magazines, was the deadliest in US history. Charles Whitman killed 14 people with a bolt action rifle from the UT bell tower. I'm not saying these disprove your assault weapons ban solution, but it's certainly not as straightforward as you're making it out to be.