• Kedly@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      It DOES mean more deaths when you are talking about the western world. Guns are a tool that are made specifically to KILL PEOPLE, they are remarkably good at it. Yes, you do have a higher level of firearm freedom from the rest of the world, and that is exactly why you have a spree shooting problem

      • GooseFinger@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        60 years ago, US citizens could mail order guns to their doorstep and shooting clubs were common place in schools, yet mass shootings like we see today were unheard of. Violence in the US has slowly decreased over time, just as it has in other western countries, but gun violence hasn’t dropped at a faster rate than that, which indicates that gun control hasn’t impacted gun violence. Increased gun control =/= decreased gun violence.

        The European countries that people point to as counter examples to this don’t have mass shootings or gun violence because gun ownership is nearly or outright impossible. Gun culture is vilified, self defense is basically illegal, and owning a gun (in countries that allow it) requires so many hoops to jump through that it’s hardly worth doing. Some people feel this level of government control is a good thing, but it’s inconsistent with the US 2nd amendment.

        If the goal is to eliminate gun violence, then guns need banned. The US can’t do that without amending their Constitution. Gun control that maintains ownership will never eliminate gun violence, so calls for more gun control will never stop.

        In order to maintain gun rights and decrease gun violence, people should ask what changed between now and 60 years ago.

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

          Your northern Neighbor, where I live, has had ONE mass shooting in recent memory, and that was in the 1980’s. You can buy guns here for hunting, and even non hunting guns for shit like farms and shooting ranges. Yes its a LOT harder to get a gun here, but if you want one and dont have mental health or abuse issues that’d make people uncomfortable with you owning one, you can jump through the hoops to get one. Every SINGLE other country has shown that increased gun control means less gun violence. On the topic of amending the Constitution… you do realize your sacred gun rights CAME from an amendment? Its fucking batshit that you consider a system thay worked when we hadnt even flown a plane yet is still workable for this day and age. The times have changed, gun laws need to change with them.

        • Kedly@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          My point is a gun can kill a LOT more people, a LOT faster, with LESS skill than any other comparable tool, which means more people can kill more victims before something is able to stop them, the kill count from a mass shooting is almost always higher than a mass stabbing. And good luck if you think your civilian firearms would be enough to take on your state of the art army. If the Army had the will to oppress its own citizens, it could, and whether or not its citizens were armed would factor very little in that will