LordFluffy t1_iu5cxbc wrote
Reply to comment by Yousoggyyojimbo in Sources: At least 6 people shot outside funeral in Pittsburgh’s Brighton Heights neighborhood by Bustalacklusta
> You don't see the same volume of attacks but just with other things in places that aren't flooded with guns.
You don't look outside of high GDP countries, then.
You also don't look at the countries you're thinking of prior to the gun controls you'd like us to emulate; you'll find they didn't have our levels of violence then, either.
> The ready availability of ideal tools for this shit is a core of the problem.
No, it isn't. Guns don't provide motive. A killer absent a gun is still a killer that just has to change tactics. A person who's not a killer with a gun is no danger to anyone provided the minimum of awareness and caution.
>Hell, the variance in gun violence just between states with tighter and looser gun control shows a hard difference.
And, as we know, all states are identical in all other ways except gun laws, just like other countries are just the US with fewer Glocks.
Yousoggyyojimbo t1_iu5dcf4 wrote
>You don't look outside of high GDP countries, then.
I like how you started this by framing that the countries that don't agree with your assertion don't count because you don't want them to.
LordFluffy t1_iu5f0hi wrote
> I like how you started this by framing that the countries that don't agree with your assertion don't count because you don't want them to.
My assertions so far are:
- People use things other than guns to kill each other
- Guns are inanimate objects not demons.
Neither of those is untrue and neither of those vary from country to country.
My point is that when you look at countries over time, their homicide rate and their gun laws don't always track like you'd expect. It has nothing to do with what I want or don't want.
My other assertion, delivered passive-aggressively I know, is that the problem of violence in the United States is complicated and does not hinge on any one factor, including means. Even if we limit it to that, there is a whole lot of nuance and footnotes that have to be added.
I know nothing about his incident than people were hurt, a gun or guns was used to do the damage, and it happened at a funeral. I don't know why it happened, if someone was targeted, if it is related to any other issue like crime or domestic abuse, if the guns were acquired legally, recently or anything else. I do, however, know that all of those could affect the "how do we stop things like this from happening in the future" equation.
Tell me what you think we should do and then how do you think we should implement that on a practical level, please. What do you think is the likely outcome?
celebrityDick t1_iu5flnc wrote
> I like how you started this by framing that the countries that don't agree with your assertion don't count because you don't want them to.
Just a countries that don't agree with your assertion don't count because you don't want them to. Call it even then ...?
tehmlem t1_iu5dx9w wrote
Wait, is your argument really "Compare us to poor countries and failed states so we look good?" Why would we not be compared to our economic and political peers which do not have these problems?
LordFluffy t1_iu5fae7 wrote
> Wait, is your argument really "Compare us to poor countries and failed states so we look good?"
No. It's that if you're saying "this doesn't happen anywhere else" you need to put an asterisk behind that because it requires some qualification.
> Why would we not be compared to our economic and political peers which do not have these problems?
We should be. We aren't, however, those countries + guns. There are many differences and I think some of them are just as if not more significant to our rates of violence than firearms.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments