4 ms·

Unfortunately, Mental illness is largely not the cause of gun violence like the media says it is, the issue is that there are so many guns out there that are so

Unfortunately, Mental illness is largely not the cause of gun violence like the media says it is, the issue is that there are so many guns out there that are so easy to get a hand on by anyone, that gun violence is so bad. And since JFK got rid of sanatoriums and expected the private companies to pick up the slack, 60 years ago, there will never be enough care as proven by the lack of care today. Sorry, we don't, nor will we ever, prioritize it enough to have any meaningful impact on gun violence. You take the weapons out of reach of people who would use them to do harm to others _first_, and only then can we make any progress on the issues. But too many companies and unscrupulous people are out there and they actively block and write legislation to make gun violence a certainty. Bad advertising and death is still good advertising to these people. As for 3D printed guns, we have a whole ATF bureau that should be on this just like they are on the illegal fully auto gun mods.

maxwell 4y ago
Unconstitutional. We keep a gun behind every blade of grass for a reason.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
ruined 4y ago
3d printed guns are as difficult to control as media piracy, which is to say, it's impossible.
- bayesian_horse 4y ago
  Not true. A 3d printed gun won't do you any good unless you at least test it and probably not until you carry it around outside your home. Plenty of chances to get caught with an illegal firearm. Between firearms being easier to detect than pirated media and police being a lot more motivated to go after them, 3D printed guns are quite controllable...
  - mgarfias 4y ago
    How’s the war on drugs working out?
    - bayesian_horse 4y ago
      Completely irrelevant response. Restricting access to guns has worked remarkably well to reduce loss of life virtually everywhere it has been tried and enacted somewhat competently. Europe doesn't regularly see school children getting dismembered by assault-style rifles. Neither does Australia, and they tightened up their gun regulation relatively recently after they figured out they had a problem.
devwastaken 4y ago
Try to legally get a handgun or semi-automatic rifle in the u.s. walk me through that process. You may be surprised to find that it's much harder than you claim it to be.
- briffle 4y ago
  My neighbor has been waiting since Dec 20th for his background check to complete, so he can get his new shotgun (not a handgun, not even a semi-automatic). Given how far back he is in line, and how much it moves in a day, he is looking at mid-february to get his shotgun. Our state is intentionally slow-walking all background checks while they try to win some court cases centered around some recent gun control ballot measures. He has a concealed carry license, which means he already completed a very detailed background check within the last 2 years in our state, and usually, approval takes something like 10 min for concealed license holders since the already have your info. Note that the federal law says if a background check takes more than 3 days, the dealer MAY give you the weapon, but most retail chains will not honor that, since they are worried about liability. That wording was put in to make sure that states and the FBI would not try to slow-walk things, under-hire, etc.
  - ofrzeta 4y ago
    Having to wait two months doesn't seem particularly hard to me.
    - notch656c 4y ago
      OP is likely from Oregon and it sounds like it could be very hard, as the delay may be imposed in association with needing further licensing after he misses the cutoff. It is my understanding there may not even be a way to get the license yet after he misses the cutoff. AFAIK the new ballot approved scheme requires this currently unobtonium new permit even for those with a CCW, and this delay may push him into unobtanium being in force.
      - mgarfias 4y ago
karaterobot 4y ago
> Unfortunately, Mental illness is largely not the cause of gun violence like the media says it is, the issue is that there are so many guns out there that are so easy to get a hand on by anyone, that gun violence is so bad. This is close to the position I used to take. I now believe it's incorrect, mostly because (I am speaking of the United States in particular) you aren't going to get people to give up their guns. It's just not going to happen on a foreseeable timeline. Add in the existence of 3D printed firearms, and it becomes a laughable prospect. If you accept that as a premise, what do you do next if you want to reduce gun deaths? Probably what you should have done in the first place, which is to attack the cause rather than the method of death.
- Ancapistani 4y ago
  > you aren't going to get people to give up their guns This is often overlooked in discussions around gun control on this board. There are at a bare minimum tens of millions of gun owners in the US. A lot of them will simply not allow them to be taken, and will use whatever level of response is necessary to prevent that from happening. I count myself among that group. I would rather die preserving the right to privately-owned weapons than willingly live in an environment where that right is not recognized. To be clear - that is not a figurative statement for me. I'm an extremely peaceful person who is deeply empathetic and do my best to help the people around me. I see violence as a last resort, but an option that is justified when there is no other alternative. In my experience, this is an extremely common perspective in "US gun culture". If your motivation is to reduce violence and preserve human life, I am extremely confident that attempting widespread confiscation of firearms in the US would not be an effective strategy.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
yellowapple 4y ago
> You take the weapons out of reach of people who would use them to do harm to others _first_, and only then can we make any progress on the issues. Translation: "we'll disarm who we please and demand that you wait until we're satisfied before we start tackling the actual issues driving violence and suicide" Nah, that ain't how this works. We as a society can and should be addressing the systemic causes of violent crime and suicide now; punting on that on the basis of "but bad people still have guns" is reprehensible.
allanmacgregor 4y ago
This is about Canada; I know is shocking but is a different country than the US. The gun regulations and laws and culture is very different from the good ol' USA.

maxwell 4y ago

Unconstitutional. We keep a gun behind every blade of grass for a reason.

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

ruined 4y ago

3d printed guns are as difficult to control as media piracy, which is to say, it's impossible.

bayesian_horse 4y ago
Not true. A 3d printed gun won't do you any good unless you at least test it and probably not until you carry it around outside your home. Plenty of chances to get caught with an illegal firearm. Between firearms being easier to detect than pirated media and police being a lot more motivated to go after them, 3D printed guns are quite controllable...
- mgarfias 4y ago
  How’s the war on drugs working out?
  - bayesian_horse 4y ago
    Completely irrelevant response. Restricting access to guns has worked remarkably well to reduce loss of life virtually everywhere it has been tried and enacted somewhat competently. Europe doesn't regularly see school children getting dismembered by assault-style rifles. Neither does Australia, and they tightened up their gun regulation relatively recently after they figured out they had a problem.

devwastaken 4y ago

Try to legally get a handgun or semi-automatic rifle in the u.s. walk me through that process. You may be surprised to find that it's much harder than you claim it to be.

briffle 4y ago
My neighbor has been waiting since Dec 20th for his background check to complete, so he can get his new shotgun (not a handgun, not even a semi-automatic). Given how far back he is in line, and how much it moves in a day, he is looking at mid-february to get his shotgun. Our state is intentionally slow-walking all background checks while they try to win some court cases centered around some recent gun control ballot measures. He has a concealed carry license, which means he already completed a very detailed background check within the last 2 years in our state, and usually, approval takes something like 10 min for concealed license holders since the already have your info. Note that the federal law says if a background check takes more than 3 days, the dealer MAY give you the weapon, but most retail chains will not honor that, since they are worried about liability. That wording was put in to make sure that states and the FBI would not try to slow-walk things, under-hire, etc.
- ofrzeta 4y ago
  Having to wait two months doesn't seem particularly hard to me.
  - notch656c 4y ago
    OP is likely from Oregon and it sounds like it could be very hard, as the delay may be imposed in association with needing further licensing after he misses the cutoff. It is my understanding there may not even be a way to get the license yet after he misses the cutoff. AFAIK the new ballot approved scheme requires this currently unobtonium new permit even for those with a CCW, and this delay may push him into unobtanium being in force.
    - mgarfias 4y ago

karaterobot 4y ago

> Unfortunately, Mental illness is largely not the cause of gun violence like the media says it is, the issue is that there are so many guns out there that are so easy to get a hand on by anyone, that gun violence is so bad. This is close to the position I used to take. I now believe it's incorrect, mostly because (I am speaking of the United States in particular) you aren't going to get people to give up their guns. It's just not going to happen on a foreseeable timeline. Add in the existence of 3D printed firearms, and it becomes a laughable prospect. If you accept that as a premise, what do you do next if you want to reduce gun deaths? Probably what you should have done in the first place, which is to attack the cause rather than the method of death.

Ancapistani 4y ago
> you aren't going to get people to give up their guns This is often overlooked in discussions around gun control on this board. There are at a bare minimum tens of millions of gun owners in the US. A lot of them will simply not allow them to be taken, and will use whatever level of response is necessary to prevent that from happening. I count myself among that group. I would rather die preserving the right to privately-owned weapons than willingly live in an environment where that right is not recognized. To be clear - that is not a figurative statement for me. I'm an extremely peaceful person who is deeply empathetic and do my best to help the people around me. I see violence as a last resort, but an option that is justified when there is no other alternative. In my experience, this is an extremely common perspective in "US gun culture". If your motivation is to reduce violence and preserve human life, I am extremely confident that attempting widespread confiscation of firearms in the US would not be an effective strategy.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]

yellowapple 4y ago

> You take the weapons out of reach of people who would use them to do harm to others _first_, and only then can we make any progress on the issues. Translation: "we'll disarm who we please and demand that you wait until we're satisfied before we start tackling the actual issues driving violence and suicide" Nah, that ain't how this works. We as a society can and should be addressing the systemic causes of violent crime and suicide now; punting on that on the basis of "but bad people still have guns" is reprehensible.

allanmacgregor 4y ago

This is about Canada; I know is shocking but is a different country than the US. The gun regulations and laws and culture is very different from the good ol' USA.