3 ms·

>Do you have some examples of additional freedoms we're missing currently? Freedom from gun violence for thousands of US children annually?

devops99 2y ago
[flagged]
- bdangubic 2y ago
  [flagged]
  - devops99 2y ago
    The inner city gang-related shootings that are counted as more than just the bulk of the "mass shootings" are not "white male".
    - bdangubic 2y ago
      [flagged]
      - giantg2 2y ago
        Is this still sarcasm? Isn't a major point in the problem that the majority of firearm violence isn't reported on, thus potentially skewing any policy solutions by obscuring the underlying problem.
        bdangubic 2y ago
        skewing any policy solutions that ship has sailed the moment United States of America collectively decided that it is acceptable to slaughter children in schools. when you make that decision as a society it is over. bringing up inner city gun violence to a gun debate is more than funny to me :)
        giantg2 2y ago
        Why would that be funny if that's statically the most relevant aspect to the problem (not gang related, but urban shootings)? Schools shootings are statistically a very small part of the overall picture, so much so that schools are statistically one of the safest places for children, even more so than at home.
        devops99 2y ago
        [dead]
        bdangubic 2y ago
        [flagged]
  - giantg2 2y ago
    I'm not sure if your sarcasm is towards your hinted at solution or the false claim of the problem. Also, isn't sarcasm against the guidelines for this reason?
    - devops99 2y ago
      [flagged]
giantg2 2y ago
I'm talking about freedoms as in things you can do that were previously restricted by law. People typically don't think of stuff like being negative for lyme disease as a "freedom" from lyme disease. But I also don't see how your claim would be applicable to the conversation at hand. It's jumping to conclusions to say a red flag law would protect thousands of children when places like RAND have not identified any evidence of their effectiveness beyond a possible reduction in suicide.

devops99 2y ago

[flagged]

bdangubic 2y ago
[flagged]
- devops99 2y ago
  The inner city gang-related shootings that are counted as more than just the bulk of the "mass shootings" are not "white male".
  - bdangubic 2y ago
    [flagged]
    - giantg2 2y ago
      Is this still sarcasm? Isn't a major point in the problem that the majority of firearm violence isn't reported on, thus potentially skewing any policy solutions by obscuring the underlying problem.
      - bdangubic 2y ago
        skewing any policy solutions that ship has sailed the moment United States of America collectively decided that it is acceptable to slaughter children in schools. when you make that decision as a society it is over. bringing up inner city gun violence to a gun debate is more than funny to me :)
        giantg2 2y ago
        Why would that be funny if that's statically the most relevant aspect to the problem (not gang related, but urban shootings)? Schools shootings are statistically a very small part of the overall picture, so much so that schools are statistically one of the safest places for children, even more so than at home.
        devops99 2y ago
        [dead]
        bdangubic 2y ago
        [flagged]
- giantg2 2y ago
  I'm not sure if your sarcasm is towards your hinted at solution or the false claim of the problem. Also, isn't sarcasm against the guidelines for this reason?
  - devops99 2y ago
    [flagged]

giantg2 2y ago

I'm talking about freedoms as in things you can do that were previously restricted by law. People typically don't think of stuff like being negative for lyme disease as a "freedom" from lyme disease. But I also don't see how your claim would be applicable to the conversation at hand. It's jumping to conclusions to say a red flag law would protect thousands of children when places like RAND have not identified any evidence of their effectiveness beyond a possible reduction in suicide.