4 ms·

When I was a kid, detention over a stupid joke would have been an extreme overreaction and would result in the teacher being pulled into the principal’s office,

When I was a kid, detention over a stupid joke would have been an extreme overreaction and would result in the teacher being pulled into the principal’s office, not the kid.

JumpCrisscross 1y ago
> detention over a stupid joke When you were a kid gun laws were stricter.
- giantg2 1y ago
  Not exactly true. You don't know how old the person is nor their jurisdiction. Some states have fewer laws, others have more. At the federal level, there are more laws and rules than there were in the 60s or 70s (overall more than at any prior time). And of course enforcement varies. I remember many people coming to school with guns in their cars during hunting season even though it's not legal.
  - JumpCrisscross 1y ago
    > You don't know how old the person is nor their jurisdiction One can impute it from the content assuming it’s relevant, i.e. in America.
    - giantg2 1y ago
      Gun laws vary dramtically by state. If we are only looking at the federal level, then there has been no substantial reduction.
      - kasey_junk 1y ago
        There was a federal assault weapons ban from 1994 to 2004.
        giantg2 1y ago
        Yes, and there have been additional law and rules changes since then (NICS, trusts, etc). Thus the number of laws and rules are not substantially lower than in the recent past.
        kasey_junk 1y ago
        Access to assault weapons is substantially easier now than it was in 1996. There maybe the same number of laws or whatever but in real terms access is easier now than then.
        giantg2 1y ago
        And what does that access mean? How many of the weapons used in school shootings would have been banned? They've done studies on the effectiveness of the ban and showed no real effect over that decade, but speculated that there could have been an effect if it went on longer. The other issue is that the ban was largely cosmetic and could easily be avoided by not including certain features that have limited utility in most domestic shootings anyways (launcher lug, flash hider, etc) as evidenced by continued AR-15 post-ban model production. So to me, the claim that there is more accessibility doesn't provide any evidence of causality.
        kasey_junk 1y ago
        I’m not making a claim about the usefulness. You made a claim about access not changing. That’s simply untrue. Access has gone up. As for the feature bans those are clearly municipalities attempts to get around either constitutional or political impediments to the bans people actually want. Magazines fed semi automatic rifles are what people want to ban, banning rifles with muzzle shrouds is how they get there. Studies on this topic are fraught because the gun industry has long prevented the normal research funding issues on this topic and have fought tooth and nail any data collection efforts.
        potato3732842 1y ago
- deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]

When I was a kid, detention over a stupid joke would have been an extreme overreaction and would result in the teacher being pulled into the principal’s office, not the kid.

JumpCrisscross 1y ago

> detention over a stupid joke When you were a kid gun laws were stricter.

giantg2 1y ago
Not exactly true. You don't know how old the person is nor their jurisdiction. Some states have fewer laws, others have more. At the federal level, there are more laws and rules than there were in the 60s or 70s (overall more than at any prior time). And of course enforcement varies. I remember many people coming to school with guns in their cars during hunting season even though it's not legal.
- JumpCrisscross 1y ago
  > You don't know how old the person is nor their jurisdiction One can impute it from the content assuming it’s relevant, i.e. in America.
  - giantg2 1y ago
    Gun laws vary dramtically by state. If we are only looking at the federal level, then there has been no substantial reduction.
    - kasey_junk 1y ago
      There was a federal assault weapons ban from 1994 to 2004.
      - giantg2 1y ago
        Yes, and there have been additional law and rules changes since then (NICS, trusts, etc). Thus the number of laws and rules are not substantially lower than in the recent past.
        kasey_junk 1y ago
        Access to assault weapons is substantially easier now than it was in 1996. There maybe the same number of laws or whatever but in real terms access is easier now than then.
        giantg2 1y ago
        And what does that access mean? How many of the weapons used in school shootings would have been banned? They've done studies on the effectiveness of the ban and showed no real effect over that decade, but speculated that there could have been an effect if it went on longer. The other issue is that the ban was largely cosmetic and could easily be avoided by not including certain features that have limited utility in most domestic shootings anyways (launcher lug, flash hider, etc) as evidenced by continued AR-15 post-ban model production. So to me, the claim that there is more accessibility doesn't provide any evidence of causality.
        kasey_junk 1y ago
        I’m not making a claim about the usefulness. You made a claim about access not changing. That’s simply untrue. Access has gone up. As for the feature bans those are clearly municipalities attempts to get around either constitutional or political impediments to the bans people actually want. Magazines fed semi automatic rifles are what people want to ban, banning rifles with muzzle shrouds is how they get there. Studies on this topic are fraught because the gun industry has long prevented the normal research funding issues on this topic and have fought tooth and nail any data collection efforts.
        potato3732842 1y ago
deleted 1y ago
[deleted]