Here we go again…

  • RQG@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    170
    arrow-down
    11
    ·
    1 year ago

    As an outsider it seems absolutely weird that the US as a country seems to have accepted people getting shot by other regular people daily as normal.

    • Chetzemoka@startrek.website
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      43
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      1 year ago

      Actual regular people haven’t accepted it as normal. Fascists in our country continue to hamstring any efforts to fix the situation because they want the rest of us to keep being reminded that the fascists can and will murder us at will. Standard issue stochastic terrorism.

    • sadie_sorceress@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      29
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      My kids’ school recently had an active shooter drill like we used to do fire drills when I was a kid. They said they all had hiding spots to go to and they thought it was pretty scary. They’re in elementary school. It’s definitely not normal that instead of doing something about the guns we have to teach kids to hide from gunmen because that’s just a legit possibility now.

        • Saik0@lemmy.saik0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          I had these in middle school… Which would have been the late 1990’s…

          It’s definitely normal… I’m not sure what the person you responded to is going on about.

          • sadie_sorceress@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            Well maybe my school was the outlier that didn’t have active shooter drills but that makes it even worse that it’s been 30+ years and nothing has changed. It should NOT be normal to have to prepare elementary kids to hide from an active shooter in their school.

            • Saik0@lemmy.saik0.com
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              1 year ago

              that it’s been 30+ years

              Uh? 2023-(late)1990s… = ~25… Please god don’t make me older than I am… I just can’t take that today.

              and nothing has changed.

              But it has, MORE schools do it now. So it’s even MORE normal now.

              It should NOT be normal to have to prepare elementary kids to hide from an active shooter in their school.

              This is a different statement than before. I agree that it should not have to be a normal thing… But unfortunately that’s what it is. But it’s not gun policies that make this the normal. If we want to talk specifically about school shootings… It doesn’t seem that legislation on gun bans alone have made any difference. https://worldpopulationreview.com/state-rankings/school-shootings-by-state

              California is by far the worst state for school shootings, and has what amounts to the strictest laws in all of the USA.

          • Malfeasant@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            I was in high school in the early 90s, we never had active ahooter drills, we just had the occasional lockdown due to gang wars…

          • tryptaminev 🇵🇸 🇺🇦 🇪🇺@feddit.de
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            1 year ago

            It is entirely possible that the timelines for their introductions were different.

            Also it is only more worrying that the problem is left unadressed since 25 years. Again nothing should be normal about school children having to learn how to hide from someone with a gun trying to kill as many of them as possible.

            The US truly seems like a failed state from the outside.

            • Stumblinbear
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              Unaddressed is a bit harsh. Maybe not fully addressed to how we would like, but measures have been attempted in the last quarter century

            • Saik0@lemmy.saik0.com
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              1 year ago

              And what EU country is rolling in success right now?

              If you’re going to walk into a conversation and the only thing you have to add is “The US truly seems like a failed state from the outside.” You’re not actually going to further that conversation at all.

              Also it is only more worrying that the problem is left unadressed since 25 years.

              What is unaddressed? What problem do you think exists here? Every time I see this argument it’s always stupidly phrased. The UK has lower rates therefore it must be gun control…

              Look at the intentional homicide rates… https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate

              Notice something? It’s South America that’s completely fucked. If we ban guns in the US… nothing stops that shit from proliferating into the USA on the southern border. Our issues are more handled with better border controls and increase mental welfare. Most violence that happens here is gang violence.

              But for one moment let’s look at this list. Notice the British Virgin Islands place on this list… Very similar controls to Britain proper… but has a 2 point higher rate than the USA…

              • tryptaminev 🇵🇸 🇺🇦 🇪🇺@feddit.de
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                4
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                1 year ago

                The issue of school shootings, and other acts of violence with the sole intent to kill random people. These things happen about once in a decade in most western countries.

                In the US they happen all the fucking time. Especially that people go out of their way to murder a bunch of elementary kids is something happening extremely rarely in other countries.Not so in the US.

                In no point did i argue about the particular reasons or solutions, but it is evident that the US is really fucked up in this regard.

                • Saik0@lemmy.saik0.com
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  3
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  The issue of school shootings, and other acts of violence with the sole intent to kill random people. These things happen about once in a decade in most western countries.

                  Uhh… I already addressed this… The link, if you had read it shows homicide rates per country. Sort by rate, look where your country is compared to the USA… then compared to some other “western” countries. Sort by Region/Subregion… Allow yourself to think about why the US might have problems. The US does have higher rates… The EU itself is surrounded

                  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mass_shootings_in_the_United_Kingdom
                  Not only are mass shootings common…

                  In no point did i argue about the particular reasons or solutions,

                  Correct, and I never said you did. I said that the argument I always hear from people who make claims like the USA is fucked up is bullshit. Showing an example of a country over here that’s ruled by Britain with British law, doing significantly worse than the USA does. Almost like it’s different over here. Probably because the EU is buffered from the third world countries… while the USA is definitely not.

                  but it is evident that the US is really fucked up in this regard.

                  It’s really not. But see, you never elaborated on what is “unaddressed” either. So there’s no way to further this discussion is there?

      • jaschen@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        My friend’s daughter is in elementary school and an active shooter came into the school. Nobody died, but later he bought her a bulletproof backpack designed for AR-15 rounds (223). But the backpack was so heavy she couldn’t carry books in it. So instead he opted for handgun rounds protection, which isn’t ideal but it’s something.

    • gizmonicus@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      22
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      As an American, I think the moment I said “which one” when asked if I had heard about the mass shooting in wherever it was I can’t even remember now, that was when I realized how fucked our gun policies are.

    • Uniquitous@lemmy.one
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      20
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      What else is there to do but accept it? It isn’t like our politicians have the will to do anything about it. Peaceful protest falls on deaf ears. The gun crazies would gladly die in a blaze of glory rather than be disarmed. The country is awash in guns and ammunition. So please do tell, oh wise outsider, what the hell a normal person is supposed to do about it?

      • RQG@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        11
        ·
        1 year ago

        Peaceful protests? There are less peaceful protests for gun control than shootings. Maybe start there.

        But I agree the US seems beyond screwed in that regard. NRA is too powerful, the two party system is stuck on the far right and society is divided into extremist views by propaganda and social media.

        So maybe leave the country? That’s what I’d do I think.

        • Uniquitous@lemmy.one
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          14
          ·
          1 year ago

          There are fewer protests these days because people are catching on that they don’t accomplish dick. As to leaving, people have families. Not just their immediate family but think aunts, uncles, cousins. It’s not trivial to leave all that behind and move somewhere where you know no one and have no support structure, and maybe you don’t even speak the language. And to even consider it, you’ve got to have the time and money to expend on moving, and your destination country has to agree to let you in. It’s not a simple undertaking.

          • RQG@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            It’s not simple at all, I absolutely agree. And leaving family behind sucks. On the other hand I know several people who left Europe and moved to Australia and Canada for example. It can work even though it won’t be easy for everyone involved. But if the alternative is having my kids get shot at school I’d still try. Plus all the social security that’s missing in the US would probably make other countries more attractive to me too.

            • Uniquitous@lemmy.one
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              1 year ago

              That’s fair. I’d probably be a lot more motivated to leave if I had kids to think about.

    • TheSanSabaSongbird@lemdro.id
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      You shouldn’t be surprised. It’s caused by the same bad actors who are responsible for most of the ways in which the US is an outlier vs its so-called peer democracies.

  • Jollyllama@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    102
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    The guys was committed for two weeks and had threatened to shoot up a national guard base. They had the information to act on and take away his guns and they didn’t because they didn’t need to. This is even more fucked because it was probably avoidable.

    • NevermindNoMind@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      60
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      There are no red flag laws in Maine. There was no legal way to take his guns even if they thought that was necessary. Also, the christofacist supreme court is set to strike down laws that prevent people convicted domestic violence from owning guns, which will chip away at the legality of red flag laws everywhere. Happy Thursday everyone!

            • SomeAmateur@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              People get wrapped around the axle about this. If you don’t know the military doesn’t turn you into John Wick. Most people in the military have never been issued a gun outside of qual, but all are given a bare minimum level of training just in case things got dire.

              Annual (if that) weapons training is basically “don’t tk your buddies 101” a bit of shooting to prove you can and cleaning after. You only get more if direct combat is your actual job, or will be soon.

              Just like anything else if you want to get good you have to put in some effort on your own time.

              • Schmuppes@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                I read your reply as “He was a weapons instructor and therefore cannot burn a fuse and go on a psychotic rampage”. I believe that is what the exchange was about before you replied. The question people are asking is “Why did he have guns” and not “How was he trained to use them”.

                • SomeAmateur@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  1 year ago

                  That’s not what I’m saying. He had a pretty good “why” for having easy access to weapons until he was checked into a mental institution. If he was a danger to himself or others I bet they could have prevented him from getting weapons. I’m interested to see why they chose not to or how their attempts failed.

                  I admit it was a deviation from the subject and might have been confusing. Every time this guy’s background is brought up people tend to think military training is some forbidden knowledge that citizens don’t have access to, which isn’t the case at all.

    • Phoenixz@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      45
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Almost all mass shootings were avoidable if that government really cared about solving this problem

  • agitatedpotato@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    76
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Every iteration of gun control, with few exceptions, carves out exceptions for LEOs and Military. If you want this to stop a good start would be making these guys have to follow the laws the rest of us do, because if you campaign for more of the same from your lawmakers, I guarantee there will still be exceptions for the people who protect the rich.

    • ryathal@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      37
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Exceptions for active military can work because they are subject to the far more strict ucmj. Cops are a real problem though, they kill 1000 or so people every year with minimal consequence.

        • BigBlackCockroach@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Not so fun fact cops were invented to prevent people like us from stealing crates in the harbor 200 years ago. They used to be just upper class people who patrolled the port. They didn’t always exist, so it’s just as possible for them to cease to exist. A society without goons in blue is possible. Cops protect the owners of the country. edit: Why can’t we commoners set up our own force to protect us the regular people?

          • PersnickityPenguin@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Before police though, we had feuds and the city would just randomly hang whomever the townspeople pinned the crimes on.

            We also didn’t have a professional firefighting force back in the day. Times change.

      • tryptaminev 🇵🇸 🇺🇦 🇪🇺@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        The ucmj being strict is worth little against someone taking up his guns and going rampage.

        Why does anyone from the Police or Military need to own firearms privately? The only reason i could think of is training, but that is a responsibility of the employer, to give enough training to the cops and soldiers.

        • ryathal@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          16
          arrow-down
          13
          ·
          1 year ago

          Private ownership of guns is allowed, asking why anyone needs it is non sequitur.

          You need to decide if you are ok with living in a free society or not. In a free society people are going to be able to do bad stuff sometimes.

          • Varixable@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            15
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            This argument would make more sense if this free society wasn’t the same society that would jail me for years for wanting to occasionally do some cocaine. As it stands, this is not a free society and this argument isn’t one.

          • RoadArchie@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            10
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            What makes you a more free person? Much smaller risk of death and suicide or owning guns? Lol

            • agitatedpotato@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              Being able to choose either of those myself is unarguably the freest. The real question is the conflicting rights. If the right to own guns is conflicting with the right to life liberty and the persuit of happiness then we need to find a resolution. Legally speaking when two rights collide like this the they typically try and preserve as much of both rights as possible. Thats not what every gun control advocate wants though. Everyone has a different version of how it should shake out.

          • Wirrvogel@feddit.de
            link
            fedilink
            Deutsch
            arrow-up
            8
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            That’s where the gun culture comes in. America has none, they just have guns and no protective, strict culture of do’s and don’ts around them. Not everything has to be restricted by law if a society decides that there are still rules. We have a social rule that when we sneeze or cough we put something in front of our mouth. It is not a law, but it is a healthy social rule that is helpful; everyone accepts that they are not free to sneeze in other people’s faces. You need either gun laws or gun culture, Switzerland chose more culture, Germany more law, both work. America chose … more guns and the “freedom” to shoot them in other people’s faces. That’s stupid and dangerous.

    • merc@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      24
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      What’s unsurprising is how strictly gun control is implemented on US military bases and navy ships.

      If you live in barracks on-base and own a personal gun, if often has to be stored in the base’s firearm storage. The only people who can walk around armed are MPs or people on their way to/from authorized training. Even if you have a concealed carry permit for the state the base is in, you can’t conceal carry in the base. If you’re on your way to the base’s firing range and stop to get gas at the base’s gas station, you can’t leave your gun in your car while you go into the convenience store at the gas station unless your car is locked in your trunk. Often even a paintball gun has to be stored in the base armory.

      Keep in mind these aren’t rules for random civilians. These are the rules for people who have already had to pass extensive firearms training courses.

      It’s pretty insane that random untrained civilians have far fewer restrictions on guns than members of the military on a military base.

      • Saik0@lemmy.saik0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        The only people who can walk around armed are MPs or people on their way to/from authorized training.

        Uh huh… I’ve carried a Mk-14 clear across base before. Nobody stopped or said shit…

        If you live in barracks on-base and own a personal gun, if often has to be stored in the base’s firearm storage.

        No… your units weapon storage… and that only because you can’t bring a gun safe into the barracks. Keep in mind that Barrack != on post housing… You can have a gun safe and many guns in your on-post non-barracks housing.

        Often even a paintball gun has to be stored in the base armory.

        No in my experience on 4 different posts.

        Even if you have a concealed carry permit for the state the base is in

        Cause Federal land doesn’t need to recognize local laws. It’s up to the post commander what they want to do.

      • agitatedpotato@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        I understand why it seems strange that the Military has stricter regulations on weapons than civilians but honestly thats a good thing to me. Not saying the level of rules on civilians is fine the way it is, however soldiers are quite literally tools of and representative of the US government, what they do, the US government does, or at the very least is accountable for. Often times what they are doing they are doing to citizens (or soldiers) of other countries as well. A random US citizen doesn’t represent the government, but an active soldier is very much representetive of theirs. From the governments POV its like self preservation.

        • merc@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          9
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Aside from all that, it’s just sane to lock down weapons.

          The military knows how dangerous they are, so they don’t let people on military bases just wander around with them. They’re carefully controlled. It’s just insanity that outside the walls the rules are less strict.

          • agitatedpotato@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            The lack of laws around weapon storage are wild. As a part of gun culture I can tell you in the US the gun culture around you is going to determine how safe the area is from guns, and in no small part due to storage habbits that somehow come down to the culture rather than the law. When I see divisions between red and blue state gun crime, it makes intament sense to me having seen how gun culture is in each place. Even the conservatives in liberal areas are generally more careful with weapons than the conservatives in area where they are the majority. Advertising is another problem that imo is a massive contribution to the negative aspects of US gun culture. Not many outside of the culture would see this but if you go to a web site that sells gun accessories and buy something, just wait for the bonkers catalogue they send you in the mail later. For me it looked like a mall ninjas paradise, with just enough inflammatory marketing to not be punished for it, and if we can’t reign that in as well I fear all we will be doing is chnging what type of gun the next shooting will be done with.

      • SomeAmateur@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Extensive firearms training is a bit of a stretch. Yes combat jobs get plenty of range time, but many only get a basic refreshers as needed (before deployment)

        But yes military bases are pretty strict compared to outside the fence

    • _dev_null@lemmy.zxcvn.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      I’m not aware of any federal exemptions to gun laws for military/ex-military citizens.

      The only ones I’ve seen relate to state gun law in e.g. AZ, where if military/ex-military want a conceal carry permit, the training requirement is waived. You still have to submit an application with fingerprints and everything to DPS. (Which is kinda moot anyway, since AZ citizens who can federally own a firearm can also open/conceal carry.)

  • Fraylor@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    80
    arrow-down
    15
    ·
    1 year ago

    Fuck Reagan. He created this shithole of a situation and ruined this country. I’m happy he died of Alzheimers and simply pray he was terrified and miserable in the last moments of his life.

      • ryathal@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        29
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Reagan dismantled the mental health institutions which were commonly abusive to patients and featured no objective pathway to release for those committed. They were basically prisons for the mentally ill and undesirable that hadn’t already committed crimes. They did successfully isolate a handful of truly dangerous people though.

      • be_excellent_to_each_other@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        22
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Reagan wrote the second amendment?

        On the off chance this question was asked in earnest:

        The typical deflection from the US right is that the real problem is that we need to put more effort into addressing mental health. (and IMO there is some truth to that)

        However, Reagan ® dismantled funding for our mental health infrastructure and was responsible for the closing of many mental health treatment centers, and Republicans since then have (to my knowledge) voted against every effort to resurrect it.

        They won’t support restrictions on gun ownership because they say the problem is mental health, but they won’t support spending on mental health either. (Most likely because they seem to oppose anything that would actually help people who suffer.)

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mental_Health_Systems_Act_of_1980

        https://sociology.org/content/vol003.004/thomas.html

        This last one is a ddg search - you can just pick which article you want to read about Republicans voting against mental health funding.

        https://duckduckgo.com/?q=republicans+vote+against+mental+health+funding

          • Donjuanme@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            The system is fucked and lacks funding, oh well let’s throw it out. Regan was okay with this because he, and almost all politicians, don’t have to live amidst it. I’m not a fan of electing people who say “it doesn’t work and it doesn’t have a chance of working so let’s not do anything about it”.

            There are plenty of examples of systems that work, if ours doesn’t work then I expect elected officials to do something about it, not spit into the wind.

          • FeetinMashedPotatoes@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Dismissing the issue as saying all mental health institutions were shit back then and he got rid of them for good reasons is just as bad as saying mass shooters issue is mental health not guns. You’re hiding behind the obvious solutions. Manage the amount of access to guns, especially for people with mental health problems. Put funding, work, policies, mandates into those mental institutions, don’t just fucking get rid of them who the fuck is that gonna help in the end?

      • rainynight65@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        The Second Amendment is possibly one of the most frequently and wilfully misinterpreted pieces of writing in the history of humanity. Right next to the bible.

    • TheFlopster@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      30
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      I think it might be the word “named” instead of “identified.” That and the two “as” appositive phrases prepositional phrases in a row.

      • snowraven@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Right, it makes sense to me now. The double “as” was definitely confusing, but “identified” instead of “named” immediately made the sentence clear. Thanks.

    • drolex@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      26
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      It’s only weird when you don’t know anybody called “US army reservist” but it’s a fairly common name around here

      -US Coast Guard war criminal

    • tilcica@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      yeah its very weird

      “as the death toll reaches 22 people, the suspect was found out to be a US army reservist”

      • Jilanico@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        18
        ·
        1 year ago

        They probably want to front load the headline with the most salient development, namely the identity of the shooter.

      • snowraven@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        I was actually refering to the headline in the picture but yeah this is an interesting piece of information too, I know the post’s title was sarcastic but didn’t know it was such a thoughtful joke haha

  • Treczoks@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    31
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    1 year ago

    Excerpt from the US version of the Prayer of the Lord: “… and give us today our daily bread mass shooting …”

  • ArcaneSlime@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    26
    arrow-down
    10
    ·
    1 year ago

    Hmmm, so all of those “well regulated militia means the national guard, the only people who should have guns are the cops and the national guard because they’re the only ones responsible enough” people are going to finally admit that cops and weekend warriors aren’t actually all that special and the training they recieve doesn’t make them good people it only makes them more effective should they decide to be bad people?

    • charles@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      People who say that actually want a complete and total ban on guns, but acknowledge the constitution says what it says and amendments are literally impossible in today’s political climate.

      Also, one could argue a “well regulated” militia wouldn’t send guns home with its members. It could be kept at a central facility.

      • ArcaneSlime@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I know they do, I was actually specifically calling that out, as they always say “nuh uh” when you point out that they do in fact want a total ban on self defense.

        One could argue anything, doesn’t make them actually correct. “The militia” is defined “as all able bodied males age 17-45,” not as “the national guard, which is a military branch not a militia.” As such, this argument says to me that “all able bodied males age 17-45” should be able to own guns and nobody else, no women, nobody in a wheelchair or with anything that would disqualify one medically from service like colorblindness, etc. Of course, that is ridiculous, but that’s why I prefer the “actually knows english” approach to that particular argument.

        • RaoulDook@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          It’s still not necessary to qualify it that way. “the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed” stands on its own with the preceding sentence explaining Why.

          Regardless of semantics, the Supreme Court has confirmed individual rights to bear arms in triplicate and that matter is settled.

        • tastysnacks@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          That’s an interesting idea. Maybe in situations like this, the governor should activate the militia to hunt this guy down. Allow the community to protect itself instead of relying only on the cops. Lots of things could go wrong, but still, it could show the intent of the 2a.

          • ArcaneSlime@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            In a sense this is already in effect to the degree that is…necessary, or maybe the word I should use is “appropriate.” If anyone who is carrying arms runs into this guy, knows what he looks like and gets a positive ID, and knows what he’s done, while it isn’t 100% legal to draw on him unless he’s presenting an active threat (i.e he has a gun out), no DA in the country would charge you with brandishing. Then from there you say freeze, he reaches for his gun, shit happens.

            The problem with deputizing the entire county for a manhunt though is giving people real authority can have some ill effects, and is pretty much guaranteeing mob justice to become a norm again. I’d say we’re at the happy medium of “nobody will question you if you do find him, but I’m not going to imbue you with the authority of the state per se.”

    • Treczoks@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Maybe you should differ between those people in active service and ex-soldiers with PTSD and mental issues that makes them hear voices…

      • ArcaneSlime@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        1 year ago

        Maybe they should differ. I think that anyone who hasn’t proven themselves a danger to others should be able to own one, even people with PTSD which shouldn’t be stigmatized simply because some people with it do violent things. Most people with PTSD do not.

        • AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Unfortunately a fact that few are willing to recognize is that if you have been homeless in the US for more than 4 weeks there is a very high (like high 90s percent) chance that you have PTSD. It’s not just the military, though us vets certainly have it as well. I’ll also wager that anyone that has spent any amount of time in our jails also has PTSD. The point I’m making is that despite the common person thinking that PTSD is just exclusive to the military, it is in fact, not.

          I haven’t actually looked into it, but I would wager that globally we have better than 6 billion people walking around with some form of PTSD.

          • ArcaneSlime@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            That and survivors of rape, assault (sexual or otherwise,) b&e, the list of potential causes is a mile long. I’d wager your wager is not at all unreasonable.

      • Satiric_Weasel@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        I have seen no indication that he had left the service, every report I have seen thus far has indicated that he was an active member of the US Army reserve serving as Sergeant First Class assigned to the 3rd Battalion, 304th Infantry Regiments in Saco, Maine.

      • JokeDeity@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        8
        ·
        1 year ago

        Why? No one, zero people, who join the military or the police, do so without the intention of using force over others. These aren’t good people, I’m not going to concern myself with what category of shitty to put them under.

            • Saik0@lemmy.saik0.com
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              6
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Yes… Because Germany held a conscription and many Nazi soldiers weren’t Nazi idealists… but rather in the military by force with threat against family. My Great Uncle died on a train transporting Jews because he was advocating for them. A Nazi officer killed him.

              You’re not talking about “Nazis” here… You’re talking about ALL SOLDIERS and equating them ALL to Nazis.

              So you can fuck right off.

        • deranger@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Many of the soldiers I know who only set foot into a hospital and only to pay for college.

          Your post is ignorant as fuck

  • Surp@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    17
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    My Aunt and Uncle live there. I heard the news at around 11pm. Called her up to make sure they were ok. They are scared in there home with doors locked.

    • merc@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      As disturbing as these mass shootings are, they’re still very rare. The vast majority of Americans will never be in a mass shooting, let alone tourists who only visit occasionally.

      It’s telling that most American police officers go their entire career without shooting their guns except at the firing range.

      But, it is a sign of US dysfunction that the problem is so obvious but there’s zero chance of the problem being solved any time soon.

      • Cyclohexane@lemmy.mlM
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        There are still a lot of gun homocides. Mass shootings are only part of the story.

        • merc@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          A lot compared to other countries, but not so many that a tourist would have to worry about it, especially if they stick to touristey areas.

          If someone decided to go into certain neighbourhoods in certain cities, especially while looking like a tourist, they could get in trouble. But, not visiting the US because you’re afraid of getting shot is like not being willing to swim anywhere in the Atlantic ocean because you’re afraid of being bitten by a shark. In both cases, the danger is minimal unless you ignore the warning signs.

      • PersnickityPenguin@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        I mean, not that rare. I remember back in college I knew 5 different people who were in a mass school shooting as a kid - all from different states.

        Just this week there have been 5 mass shootings.

        • merc@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          So, you know some people who were in a mass shooting, but they lived. If they know some people who died in a mass shooting that’s two degrees of separation between you and a mass shooting death.

          As for the mass shootings this week, they include a convenience store robbery, something that seems to be a murder-suicide where someone killed their family, a shootout over a stolen car, shots at a house party. And, in only 2 of those cases (the 5 dead in a house, and the rampage in Maine) were more than 1 person killed. These all technically qualify as mass shootings, but the rampage in Maine is the only kind we really think of as being a typical mass shooting.

          It’s far too many. There’s no question about that. It’s also absurd how much more frequent it is in the US compared to other places. On the other hand, the US has a population of 330 million people. So, while the odds of dying in a mass shooting are higher in the US than any other developed country in the world, it’s hardly a warzone. The vast majority of people in the US will not be in a mass shooting ever. Most people will never be shot in their lives. And tourists shouldn’t avoid the US out of a fear of being involved in a mass shooting. Yes, it’s much more likely in the US than in say Japan. But, the overall odds are low.

    • rab@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      I think that depends where you go. I live in BC but go to Washington all the time and it feels pretty much just as safe.

    • Rambi@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      It was in the news in the UK a few years ago that a doctor visited the US to see some of his family that lived there, and while he was asleep in bed a stray bullet hit him and he died. Obviously I’m sure these things are unlikely but it’s still kind of scary. That and I find the idea of walking around and having deranged psychos all around me potentially having a gun and them being able to pull it out and end my life at any moment kind of… unpleasant.

        • Rambi@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Okay I guess. I personally like just being able to live my life without almost getting shot every couple of hours. I have a friend who basically sounds exactly like you and lives in Texas, he also told me that he hears gunshots around him like multiple times a day. Forgive me but that doesn’t sound particularly appealing.

        • can@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Isn’t having a crazy powerful military enough? The Spanish and French aren’t about to set fires in the US anymore.

    • Malfeasant@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      1 year ago

      Eh, it’s safer now than it was 30 years ago, your odds of actually running into anyone with a gun are extremely low.

      • Liz@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        I love how people are mad that you’re right. The only technicality I’d add is that concealed carry is a thing, so you likely walk past people carrying without knowing it, but that’s the whole point of concealed carry in the first place.

        Mass shooting events like this are a social problem that ends up being very complex when you start to actually try and figure out why they happen and how to prevent them. There is no short answer, but Angry White Men by Michael Kimmel is a good place to start.

  • Jeff@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    This timeline is a bad one. We need father time to make the old in power fade away so we can attempt to fix what the worst generation has broken.

  • tym@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    arrow-down
    14
    ·
    1 year ago

    This motherfucker is slowly making his way toward my home and children. Last sighting is 35 min away or so.

    I don’t have a gun and I regret that choice right now. I wouldn’t wish this feeling of helplessness and terror on anyone.

    This is always a mental health issue at its core.

    Humor me and pick up a copy of Susan Faludis book “stiffed”

    This is the 90s all over again. Fuck.

      • tym@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Lewiston Maine. The (formerly) safest state in the union.

        Dudes Twitter likes were Trump Jr, tucker Carlson and all kinds of other MAGAt fodder. Also one of two retweets mentioned mass murder.

      • Woht24@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        You think the police will come and take care of you because you feel scared when there’s an active shooter on the loose?

        Ridiculous.

          • SomeAmateur@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Yup. I used to be a vol firefighter. If your response time for any emergency service is under 5min you’re very lucky. But often even that isn’t enough. You need the tools and skills to do what you can until help arrives. Fire prevention, medical and self/fam defense. Until they get there it is up to you, and many people don’t realize that.

          • Saik0@lemmy.saik0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Where I live the police are about fifteen minutes away.

            I live in a densely populated area… They’re still 15 minutes away.