Post AijHaoCphRiF24MLq4 by PJPaints@warhammer.social
(DIR) More posts by PJPaints@warhammer.social
(DIR) Post #AijBeUqyzh4qRfVxzM by Radical_EgoCom@mastodon.social
2024-06-08T19:47:45Z
0 likes, 1 repeats
@AnarchoKitty Addressing the issues at the source would involve some level of gun restrictions on people who pose an immediate or potential threat to society. Say, for instance, someone who's prone to violence even when unprovoked tried and failed to commit a violent act, whether with or without a gun, and then this person attempts to go buy a gun for an undisclosed reason. It would, at the very least, be logical to prevent that person and anyone else like them from owning firearms.
(DIR) Post #AijC7naUQ8Vuwglx2m by facsimile_willows@veganism.social
2024-06-08T19:52:29Z
0 likes, 1 repeats
@AnarchoKitty I don't really believe that gun control measures will ever lead to structural change either, that isn't really what bandage solutions do.Perhaps an example of my perspective could be found in charities? I very strongly dislike them. They are at best bandage solutions to larger societal issues, and at worst predatory on the very issues they claim to address. They are not causes that you "donate" to so much as they are a commodification of morality of ethics, treating these concepts as though they can be listed on a receipt. The product you purchase from them is moral and ethical gratification (and also tax breaks).With that being said, for all their flaws, and for however much I may dislike them, I still recognize that they do material good. They are flawed solutions for flawed societies; I think it could be argued that their flaws are characteristic of the flaws in the societies they are produced in. You would never find me saying that charities for humanitarian aid for Palestinians are a waste of time, despite my overall feelings on charities, for instance.I suppose I understand your frustration with the issues of gun control measures and other bandage solutions though, even if I disagree with the notion that they are pointless.
(DIR) Post #AijCifT5ZStYTitJsu by facsimile_willows@veganism.social
2024-06-08T18:15:56Z
0 likes, 1 repeats
@AnarchoKitty I care about more than just shootings, and more than just violent crime as a whole. I care about people, right now in our current conditions, not being killed or injured. Temporary bandage solutions are useful until the larger structural issues are able to be addressed. To dismiss them as pointless is to choose not to use a tourniquet on someone losing blood at a life-threatening pace in an isolated area because they should be in a hospital instead where the source of the issue would be treated.I should think it is not necessary for me to provide statistics on the amount of mass shootings in areas with adequate gun control compared to those with lax gun control. I believe you are well aware of the fact that these statistics would show a high correlation with areas that have lower amounts of gun violence and higher amounts of gun control--even if you disagree with the notion that these regulations are the causation of that reduction in gun violence.Regarding the smoking example, I am mainly speaking in regards to public health and safety--ex. regulative measures to prevent smoking in public areas that would expose people to second hand smoke, and the associated health concerns resulting from that. I did not mean this as a personal offence, and should have considered how it would come off (I did not see the cigarette in your pfp, and had not made the connection until after my post. I apologize if it seemed like a personal attack).
(DIR) Post #AijCjJp7WyHlddVTmK by facsimile_willows@veganism.social
2024-06-08T17:44:50Z
0 likes, 1 repeats
@AnarchoKitty This isn't true. We have observed in a number of countries where smoking was previously extremely common, dramatic declines due to laws and regulations aimed at addressing safety and health of the public. Were these laws a bandage solution to the actual reasons someone would choose to smoke? Yes. Were they still useful despite their flaws? Also yes.Forgive me if I am misinterpreting you, but by this logic it would seem that we should also do away with laws to wear seat belts, follow speed limits, abolish anti-discrimination laws, not support mask mandates, etc.
(DIR) Post #AijE2uYNIHrN0ha2Xg by Radical_EgoCom@mastodon.social
2024-06-08T20:14:31Z
0 likes, 1 repeats
@AnarchoKitty The effects of gun control can be minimal and certain, and gun control itself is not a fixed all solution, but let's go back to my hypothetical. A person with a history of unprovoked violence goes to buy a gun. Do you think that they should be stopped from buying the gun, knowing that this person would most likely use the gun for more unprovoked violence given their history? My answer is yes because even though gun control won't solve every problem, it can stop immediate threats.
(DIR) Post #AijFdaNxLCjb83l6h6 by Radical_EgoCom@mastodon.social
2024-06-08T20:32:26Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@AnarchoKitty I'm not exactly sure how you're proposing the problem in the hypothetical would be solved. So, the person with dangerous violent tendencies buys a gun, and then what?
(DIR) Post #AijHaoCphRiF24MLq4 by PJPaints@warhammer.social
2024-06-08T20:54:19Z
0 likes, 1 repeats
@Radical_EgoCom @AnarchoKitty well yes gun control makes a massive difference. Whilst violent crime may still happen the potential for harm with a gun is far greater than without.
(DIR) Post #AijI6O1Wa44n607y3E by Radical_EgoCom@mastodon.social
2024-06-08T21:00:02Z
0 likes, 1 repeats
@AnarchoKitty 1/2 The solutions that you presented, while being good solutions for dealing with potential gun violence, seem far too risky to use alone without some form of gun restriction. If rehabilitation and non-association fail, which it is bound to in some cases, then you'll eventually have people having to have gun fights with dangerous people who shouldn't have guns in the first place, which would result in many physical and psychological damages.
(DIR) Post #AijIALSG4c2GHrWHEe by Radical_EgoCom@mastodon.social
2024-06-08T21:00:46Z
0 likes, 1 repeats
@AnarchoKitty 2/2 It wouldn't be a good idea to use either of the solutions independently (gun restrictions or rehabilitation/reform), but instead to use them synchronically. It isn't wise to just let people (racist, fascist, and other reactionary bigots) have guns when you very well know what they're going to use them for.
(DIR) Post #AijK4DU2zrkhjgYtd2 by Radical_EgoCom@mastodon.social
2024-06-08T21:22:03Z
0 likes, 1 repeats
@AnarchoKitty Gun restrictions and background checks do work at reducing gun violence. Places with strict gun laws (like Japan, Singapore, and South Korea) experience little to no gun violence because the laws deters illegal gun trafficking, reducing the prevalence of firearms in the hands of dangerous people. Strict gun laws have been proven to make communities safer.
(DIR) Post #AijLAbGrZKXXCd0Ejo by Radical_EgoCom@mastodon.social
2024-06-08T21:34:25Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@AnarchoKitty Your suggesting that dangerous people be allowed to have guns and instead focus on the systemic causes of gun violence, and I'm suggesting to not allow dangerous people to have guns while also focus on the systemic sources of gun violence. Why is it that you want dangerous people to be able to own guns?
(DIR) Post #AijLBpkxCLlePxfLBw by AWolfInCheapClothing@calckey.world
2024-06-08T21:27:17.749Z
0 likes, 1 repeats
@Radical_EgoCom@mastodon.social @AnarchoKitty@kolektiva.social Up here in Canada gun control works, here any gun related deaths is a rare tragedy, unlike a daily occurrence in the States!
(DIR) Post #AijNLdPs8IF4wxbe6a by Radical_EgoCom@mastodon.social
2024-06-08T21:58:50Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@AnarchoKitty You don't want there to be any gun restrictions at all, which means that anyone would be able to obtain a gun, including dangerous people. That's what I mean by you wanting dangerous people to have guns. You don't want gun restrictions that would prevent anyone from obtaining guns, including dangerous people. I don't see the practicality in not having some form of gun control to make it harder for dangerous people to attain guns while also focusing on the source of gun crimes,...
(DIR) Post #AijNMP139suKZsMV4y by Radical_EgoCom@mastodon.social
2024-06-08T21:58:57Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@AnarchoKitty ...rather than just doing the former as you're suggesting.
(DIR) Post #AijNQ3sjg08WBpDZ8S by Blackstarwritings@mastodon.social
2024-06-08T21:59:35Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Radical_EgoCom @AnarchoKitty So I tend to not care for the more/less guns debate, however, with the proliferation of 3D printed gun designs, the concept of controlling guns is, increasingly, becoming quite difficult. As for my over all opinions on the subject, I'll drop this article that I wrote here, for anyone interested. Not to side-step the conversation, just wanted to share it. A bit dated, but still worth sharing I think.https://blackstarwritings36.wordpress.com/2018/05/02/gun-control-mass-shootings-and-community-defense/
(DIR) Post #AijOSq77QDsWJOpl7A by Radical_EgoCom@mastodon.social
2024-06-08T22:11:20Z
0 likes, 1 repeats
@AnarchoKitty I don't see how taking guns away from people who will most likely commit violence with their guns will make anything worse, and I don't see why you're so against that as a concept. I understand that governments have used gun control against marginalized groups, but that sounds like a problem with the government, not with the concept of gun control.
(DIR) Post #AijQLmM1CZcUX5Z1tI by Doctor_Garrett@mastodon.social
2024-06-08T22:32:28Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Radical_EgoCom Governments are inherently corrupt & they take the guns away from those who oppose their corruption.
(DIR) Post #AijQc2cAVtTTb4sA0e by Doctor_Garrett@mastodon.social
2024-06-08T22:35:24Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Radical_EgoCom the police in those same countries gun down protestors & critics of the government.
(DIR) Post #AijQiLz3Pd6dPHaSSu by Radical_EgoCom@mastodon.social
2024-06-08T22:36:33Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Doctor_Garrett That doesn't negate the necessity for some form of gun control.
(DIR) Post #AijQnA9eosecASq8Mi by Radical_EgoCom@mastodon.social
2024-06-08T22:37:25Z
0 likes, 1 repeats
@AnarchoKitty "Gun control doesn't do anything" is a blatantly false claim. Gun control alone can't fully prevent gun violence, but it can, and has, reduce violent crimes. Ignoring the effectiveness of gun control ignores the good results it has had in places where strong measures have been taken, such as resulting in fewer gun-related incidents.
(DIR) Post #AijR3LbK1xkSIiUtEm by Doctor_Garrett@mastodon.social
2024-06-08T22:40:20Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Radical_EgoCom I want the coppers including F.D.A. to know that I am ready to protect myself.
(DIR) Post #AijRuWyiScTsw1ncwK by Radical_EgoCom@mastodon.social
2024-06-08T22:49:58Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@AnarchoKitty You're implying that gun controln is ineffective solely based on immediate changes in violent crime rates, disregarding the positive long-term effects of gun control, such as the reduced lethality of violent incidents and the potential decrease in the proliferation of illegal firearms over time.