6 ms·

> It reminded me of the time Roy Wood Jr visited a pro-gun rally where they argued guns make people safe, while simultaneously asking people to not carry guns b

by blagie 2y ago

> It reminded me of the time Roy Wood Jr visited a pro-gun rally where they argued guns make people safe, while simultaneously asking people to not carry guns because they were worried about safety. The cognitive dissonance is worth pointing out. Well, no. It's irony, but it's only cognitive dissonance in a comedy show which misses the nuance. Most pro-gun organizations are heavily into gun safety. The message is that guns aren't unsafe if they're being used correctly. Most of the time, this means that most guns should be locked up in a safe, with ammo in a separate safe, except when being transported to a gun range, for hunting, or similar. When being used there, one should follow a specific set of procedures for keeping those activities safe as well. It's a perfect analogy for the LLM here too. Anthropic encourages it for many uses, but not for the one textbox. Irony? Yes. Wrong? Probably not.

numbsafari 2y ago
These are the same people that insist we arm elementary school teachers and expect those teachers to someday pull the trigger on a child instead of having proper gun laws. There is no irony.
- ThunderSizzle 2y ago
  I don't expect that, so I won't be using public schools. I have no illusion that safety or education is an actual concern in public schools in general.
  - DiscourseFan 2y ago
    They do, but safety and social control go hand in hand. In any case, its not as if your kid is safer at a private school. Kids are violent, no matter where they are; maybe you remember going through school yourself?
- imchillyb 2y ago
  When have gun laws ever stopped a shooting? When have criminals EVER followed law, code, rules, or even a suggestion from their fellow citizens? Believing laws deter criminals is almost criminally insane and beggars all logic. After all of the accumulated evidence against your belief, you still believe laws deter criminality. The death penalty doesn’t deter criminals. How could words possibly have an effect?
  - plopilop 2y ago
    > When have gun laws ever stopped a shooting? Have you heard of Australia? https://www.sydney.edu.au/news-opinion/news/2018/03/13/gun-laws-stopped-mass-shootings-in-australia.html https://www.sydney.edu.au/news-opinion/news/2018/03/13/gun-l...
    - robertlagrant 2y ago
      Australia has no land borders. It's one of the easiest places to secure, and thus it makes sense to do so.
  - mikepurvis 2y ago
    Because most of gun safety is not actually about criminals; it’s about regular people with legal firearms becoming involved in crimes of passion, tragic accidents, and suicides. America is the worst industrialized country for gun deaths because the guns are present to enable those things to happen. Countless studies show that the key to reducing gun deaths is not more training, more “good guys”, or whatever else — it’s simply having fewer gun households period.
    - Viliam1234 2y ago
      Somehow, in Switzerland every household has a gun, and yet they don't have the American levels of crime.
      - mikepurvis 2y ago
        And indeed, a high proportion of gun deaths in Switzerland are suicides: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firearms_regulation_in_Switzerland#Firearm-related_deaths https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firearms_regulation_in_Switzer... This tracks with: - High gun ownership - Strong gun responsibility culture (guns are safely stored, so fewer accidents) - Strong gun regulation (guns require permits that are not issued to those with criminal records)
  - spinningslate 2y ago
- toolz 2y ago
  If you think proper gun laws would keep guns away from evil people in the US, please explain to me why the war against illegal drugs in the US has been losing since the day it started. Sure, some places in the world can successfully limit gun access. Those places aren't close and even bordered by the most active cartels in the world. Just as a fun thought exercise, consider that to grow the plant necessary to produce just a single drug, cocaine, for the country, every year. It takes at least 300,000 acres, or roughly the size of los angeles. That's after decades of optimizations to reduce the amount of land needed. It's also only for one drug among a vast number that are regularly consumed in the US. In relation, you can 3d print guns at home. Successful builds have been made from some of the cheapest 3d printers you can find.
  - shigawire 2y ago
    Drugs are more addictive than guns typically. I am not sure your comparison is useful.
    - toolz 2y ago
      yet in the US just as many households have reported using drugs as own guns
  - LeapingLennie 2y ago
    Regarding the drugs vs guns comparison, I bet you'd find that every country that has implemented reasonably effective gun control still has thriving illicit drug markets. Australia is just as zealous at persecuting the drug war as the US but continues to fail at that whereas gun crime is very low.
    - toolz 2y ago
      Australians, for example, don't want guns relative to Americans. It's not hard to ban things people don't want. Prior to 1996 gun laws in Australia, home ownership was like 15%. In the US it's been as high as 45% in recent years. As far as the number of guns owned, we have more guns than people. So yeah, taking a country with 1/3rd the ownership down 75% with regulation that isn't bordered by cartels isn't that shocking to me. You would never achieve that in the US and that's incredibly obvious to me by looking at the gun crime stats in places that do already have gun control laws in the US.
wepple 2y ago
Huge miss on the gun analogy. The likes of NRA are pushing for 50-state constitutional carry. Everyone has a gun on their person with no licensing requirements. Yet at the NRA conference they ban guns. There’s probably actually some other hidden factor though, like the venue not allowing it. Edit: FWIW those late night TV shows are nothing but rage bait low brow “comedy” that divides the country. But the above remains true.
- blagie 2y ago
  > Everyone has a gun on their person with no licensing requirements. Yet at the NRA conference they ban guns. That's not what the NRA is pushing for, any more than there are Democrats pushing for mandatory sex changes for all kids (yes, this is cited on similar right-wing comedy shows, and individuals on the right believe it). Pushing for a right doesn't mean 100% of the population will exercise that right. And yes, most venues (as well as schools, government buildings, etc.) will not allow guns. If there's a security guard, police, or similar within spitting distance, there isn't a reasonable self-defence argument. One of the interesting pieces of data is looking at 2nd amendment support versus distance to the nearest police station / police officer / likely law enforcement response times. It explains a lot about where support / opposition comes from.
  - imchillyb 2y ago
    There are LEOs that were prosecuted by states and the federal government for not taking action while children were being shot by another child. LEOs are expected to take fire to protect civilians. Protect & Serve is their credo. I wouldn’t trust LEOs to protect me, so I sure as hell fire am not trusting a low paid rent-a-cop to perform a similar duty. Nope. I believe that my mindset is prevalent and not an outlier.
    - plagiarist 2y ago
      I would trust a security guard more. They have consequences for misconduct or failure to do their job. (Assuming they aren't an on-duty LEO who is "overemployed.") Not enough that I think they'd protect me in a situation that requires a gun. Just more than a cop.
7bit 2y ago
> Well, no. It's irony, but it's only cognitive dissonance in a comedy show which misses the nuance. Like the nuance between sending out your love and doing the Nazi salute? Or different?
gosub100 2y ago
My guess is it's more due to insurance at the venue. I don't know who pays in those situations, but I would imagine they require "no guns" posted and announced. And if there is any form of gunshot injury they have very strong teeth to dodge the claim.
- aerostable_slug 2y ago
  The truth is that you can carry concealed at the NRA convention. It's a myth that they don't allow guns there. The Secret Service disallows normal people to have guns in the same room where their protectees are speaking. If you want to watch one of the speeches and stay armed, there are other conference rooms / ballrooms with big monitors set up. Many attendees take advantage of this offer.

by blagie 2y ago

numbsafari 2y ago

These are the same people that insist we arm elementary school teachers and expect those teachers to someday pull the trigger on a child instead of having proper gun laws. There is no irony.

ThunderSizzle 2y ago
I don't expect that, so I won't be using public schools. I have no illusion that safety or education is an actual concern in public schools in general.
- DiscourseFan 2y ago
  They do, but safety and social control go hand in hand. In any case, its not as if your kid is safer at a private school. Kids are violent, no matter where they are; maybe you remember going through school yourself?
imchillyb 2y ago
When have gun laws ever stopped a shooting? When have criminals EVER followed law, code, rules, or even a suggestion from their fellow citizens? Believing laws deter criminals is almost criminally insane and beggars all logic. After all of the accumulated evidence against your belief, you still believe laws deter criminality. The death penalty doesn’t deter criminals. How could words possibly have an effect?
- plopilop 2y ago
  > When have gun laws ever stopped a shooting? Have you heard of Australia? https://www.sydney.edu.au/news-opinion/news/2018/03/13/gun-laws-stopped-mass-shootings-in-australia.html https://www.sydney.edu.au/news-opinion/news/2018/03/13/gun-l...
  - robertlagrant 2y ago
    Australia has no land borders. It's one of the easiest places to secure, and thus it makes sense to do so.
- mikepurvis 2y ago
  Because most of gun safety is not actually about criminals; it’s about regular people with legal firearms becoming involved in crimes of passion, tragic accidents, and suicides. America is the worst industrialized country for gun deaths because the guns are present to enable those things to happen. Countless studies show that the key to reducing gun deaths is not more training, more “good guys”, or whatever else — it’s simply having fewer gun households period.
  - Viliam1234 2y ago
    Somehow, in Switzerland every household has a gun, and yet they don't have the American levels of crime.
    - mikepurvis 2y ago
      And indeed, a high proportion of gun deaths in Switzerland are suicides: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firearms_regulation_in_Switzerland#Firearm-related_deaths https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firearms_regulation_in_Switzer... This tracks with: - High gun ownership - Strong gun responsibility culture (guns are safely stored, so fewer accidents) - Strong gun regulation (guns require permits that are not issued to those with criminal records)
- spinningslate 2y ago
toolz 2y ago
If you think proper gun laws would keep guns away from evil people in the US, please explain to me why the war against illegal drugs in the US has been losing since the day it started. Sure, some places in the world can successfully limit gun access. Those places aren't close and even bordered by the most active cartels in the world. Just as a fun thought exercise, consider that to grow the plant necessary to produce just a single drug, cocaine, for the country, every year. It takes at least 300,000 acres, or roughly the size of los angeles. That's after decades of optimizations to reduce the amount of land needed. It's also only for one drug among a vast number that are regularly consumed in the US. In relation, you can 3d print guns at home. Successful builds have been made from some of the cheapest 3d printers you can find.
- shigawire 2y ago
  Drugs are more addictive than guns typically. I am not sure your comparison is useful.
  - toolz 2y ago
    yet in the US just as many households have reported using drugs as own guns
- LeapingLennie 2y ago
  Regarding the drugs vs guns comparison, I bet you'd find that every country that has implemented reasonably effective gun control still has thriving illicit drug markets. Australia is just as zealous at persecuting the drug war as the US but continues to fail at that whereas gun crime is very low.
  - toolz 2y ago
    Australians, for example, don't want guns relative to Americans. It's not hard to ban things people don't want. Prior to 1996 gun laws in Australia, home ownership was like 15%. In the US it's been as high as 45% in recent years. As far as the number of guns owned, we have more guns than people. So yeah, taking a country with 1/3rd the ownership down 75% with regulation that isn't bordered by cartels isn't that shocking to me. You would never achieve that in the US and that's incredibly obvious to me by looking at the gun crime stats in places that do already have gun control laws in the US.

wepple 2y ago

Huge miss on the gun analogy. The likes of NRA are pushing for 50-state constitutional carry. Everyone has a gun on their person with no licensing requirements. Yet at the NRA conference they ban guns. There’s probably actually some other hidden factor though, like the venue not allowing it. Edit: FWIW those late night TV shows are nothing but rage bait low brow “comedy” that divides the country. But the above remains true.

blagie 2y ago
> Everyone has a gun on their person with no licensing requirements. Yet at the NRA conference they ban guns. That's not what the NRA is pushing for, any more than there are Democrats pushing for mandatory sex changes for all kids (yes, this is cited on similar right-wing comedy shows, and individuals on the right believe it). Pushing for a right doesn't mean 100% of the population will exercise that right. And yes, most venues (as well as schools, government buildings, etc.) will not allow guns. If there's a security guard, police, or similar within spitting distance, there isn't a reasonable self-defence argument. One of the interesting pieces of data is looking at 2nd amendment support versus distance to the nearest police station / police officer / likely law enforcement response times. It explains a lot about where support / opposition comes from.
- imchillyb 2y ago
  There are LEOs that were prosecuted by states and the federal government for not taking action while children were being shot by another child. LEOs are expected to take fire to protect civilians. Protect & Serve is their credo. I wouldn’t trust LEOs to protect me, so I sure as hell fire am not trusting a low paid rent-a-cop to perform a similar duty. Nope. I believe that my mindset is prevalent and not an outlier.
  - plagiarist 2y ago
    I would trust a security guard more. They have consequences for misconduct or failure to do their job. (Assuming they aren't an on-duty LEO who is "overemployed.") Not enough that I think they'd protect me in a situation that requires a gun. Just more than a cop.

7bit 2y ago

> Well, no. It's irony, but it's only cognitive dissonance in a comedy show which misses the nuance. Like the nuance between sending out your love and doing the Nazi salute? Or different?

gosub100 2y ago

My guess is it's more due to insurance at the venue. I don't know who pays in those situations, but I would imagine they require "no guns" posted and announced. And if there is any form of gunshot injury they have very strong teeth to dodge the claim.

aerostable_slug 2y ago
The truth is that you can carry concealed at the NRA convention. It's a myth that they don't allow guns there. The Secret Service disallows normal people to have guns in the same room where their protectees are speaking. If you want to watch one of the speeches and stay armed, there are other conference rooms / ballrooms with big monitors set up. Many attendees take advantage of this offer.