That’s all well and good, maybe guns are inherently problematic. But since no one is paying attention to my wording I’ll just say it:
Right wingers and neo-fascists commit the majority of gun violence in this country and will absolutely never give them up. They are not the poor and unsophisticated rednecks you’re told they are, they tend to be richer than average and their brand of violence is calculated. Many of them are current and former police officers and therefore won’t take their friends’ guns away just because the law says so.
If you’re poor you’re less likely to be white and straight and therefore more likely to be harassed or killed by the aforementioned groups.
This is not me saying that it’s time to give up on gun control laws or that we need more guns. Fewer guns in the US will mean a more peaceful country. I’m saying that laws that simply make it more expensive to buy and own guns will not deter violent people from buying them because they impose no restrictions on them.
Can you support your assertion that right wingers and neo-fascists commit the majority of gun violence in this country? I realize how much of the info around this subject is propaganda so I like to look at the data whenever I can find it?
I can’t wait to see the faces of all you freedom hating dipshits when this and many other gun control efforts are appealed and fail the new Bruen standard.
HA HA motherfuckers. Gun rights are winning no matter what you try.
LOL what a swing and a miss. I read all of Thompson’s books in the 90s, probably before you were born. Except Kingdom of Fear, that came out this century.
The day a conservative talks to me about freedom and I don’t laugh in their face is the day I’ve gone completely fucking stupid.
Conservatives have zero credibility on freedom.
Even the Second Amendment is a liberal invention, which conservatives had to rewrite and ignore history, and even certain parts of the Second Amendment itself, in order to fetishize it as they do.
I’m not a “conservative” as the neocon and trumptard groups have taken over that label with their brands of madness.
I’m an Independant who pretty much hates all of the politicians we have. I only vote for those who do not propose to limit any of our freedoms.
As an Independant and having been politically active since the prior century, I have mountains of credibility on the subject of Freedom. I was here protesting the PATRIOT Act, the Afghanistan and Iraq wars, the endless War on Terror, and the War on Drugs probably when you were a baby. I was against those wars when Obama continued them too. I voted against Trump 3 times.
So yeah, go on about my credibility if you want to but you have nothing on me.
Well, you’re taking a modern conservative view on the Second Amendment. That view is based on lies. So no you don’t have credibility as far as that is concerned.
Most uses of firearms in the US are not self-defense. But funnily enough, if there were fewer guns… there’d be fewer need for those few self-defense cases.
According to Gun Violence Archive in 2023 so far there have been 888 deaths due to defensive use of firearms, out of a total of 31,900 deaths from firearms from all causes. That’s 2.78%, which is about a 36:1 ratio.
So yeah- most firearm-caused deaths in the US are not from self-defense, and it’s not even close either.
That’s a nice figure you have there. Would be a shame if somebody thought about the context of those numbers…
Like how many defensive gun uses occur where nobody is killed because the attacker was deterred without the necessity of violence. You don’t have numbers for that because they only count deaths.
Would be a shame if somebody thought about the context of those numbers…
Why, when I said
most firearm-caused deaths in the US are not from self-defense
while linking to the stats to show deaths from firearms in the US, would I say anything about non-lethal defensive uses of firearms? The point was to show the ratio of self-defensive lethal uses of firearms compared to all lethal uses of firearms.
most firearm-caused deaths in the US are not from self-defense
Except you didn’t. You said “uses of firearms” which also includes sport and hunting as well as self defense. What you actually said is completely false and then you just lied and pretended you said something completely different. You also posted a ridiculously biased and incomplete propaganda site as a valid source of fact, probably because any remotely academic source would give the exact opposite. Even the CDC found that defensive uses far outnumber offensive uses before gun control groups forced them to delete the peer reviewed data for political reasons.
What I said: Self-defense is a minority of gun usage in the US (a fact you and I both agree on).
The first commenter said that offensive and suicides outnumber self-defense (which eliminates sport from the discussion).
What I said next: If you count deaths, then self-defense makes up a minority of firearm-related deaths (and yes, I did use deaths because that’s an easier to track statistic than “people who used a gun in an assault/defense but nobody was hurt.” However, even if tracking that is possible, it’d be unreasonable to assume it’d change the ratio in any meaningful way.)
Furthermore, GVA’s lists their methodology here. Of course an organization devoted to stopping gun violence would be biased towards stopping gun violence, but that doesn’t make them wrong. Feel free to point out where their methodology is flawed.
Even the CDC found that defensive uses far outnumber offensive uses before gun control groups forced them to delete the peer reviewed data for political reasons.
You got a source for that claim from a reputable news organization? Cause all I’m seeing is “CDC allegedly removed report” headlines from various far-right sites.
Yeah you can go on about the semantics, but what I said was still relevant to the overall picture of the situation. Ideally the numbers of deaths from all sources would be low, but in reality they won’t ever be. When self defense can save lives, it’s worth noting its value.
Bro just stop already. You like guns, it’s a neat little hobby, and you’re getting angry because people want to end it. I get that. My hobby is retro video games/consoles, and if it turned out that they were a threat to society and people wanted to take them away, I probably wouldn’t do the sane/rational/adult thing and accept it. I’d fight to defend my god given right to own a Wii, and I’d get into angry bad faith arguments on the internet in a desperate attempt to protect my cherished pastime.
…but I’d be wrong, I’d be an asshole, and I probably wouldn’t realize it. I like to think that I’d have the self-awareness to not fall into that trap, since I generally consider myself to be self-aware, but also I really love this hobby and it’s a big part of my life, so it could go either way.
Nope, I will never stop. It’s not about “a hobby” it’s about the rights of all Americans.
If any of you had any fucking perspective, you’d realize that our rights are something that millions have died to obtain and it’s absolutely moronic to give any of them up.
Don’t waste your time. People here aren’t looking for a rational discussion. This is the “shit on anyone who values their own safety” thread. Most of these commenters have only ever seen guns on the news, in the hands of criminals, who obviously don’t give a shit about these new laws.
I used to have to listen to my neighbor doing target practice with his semiautomatic pistol until his stepdaughter took a secret video of him beating the shit out of her mom and gave it to her teacher. He got all his most favoritest fancy boy toys taken away and now I just have to listen to him loudly fussing about it and blaming everyone but himself for it happening.
He’s an Olympic level cunt muffin with no sense of personal responsibility or care for the safety of others. Everyone I know who owns semiautomatic weapons is pretty much the exact same garbage personality type. Or a cop.
You have just described the process of making yourself prejudiced. Does it feel nice to know that you harbor prejudice against your fellow American citizens, millions of us?
Interestingly enough, most gun control laws disproportionately disarm people who aren’t in the demographics you listed. In fact, historically, gun control has usually been used to disarm minorities so they can more easily be intimidated, harassed, and murdered. Which side of history are you on? The side that empowers minorities, or the side that disarms them and prevents them from choosing any path other than victimization?
Yeah, that needs a citation. I’ve heard this point parroted time and again, but never have seen data demonstrating it.
Minorities are getting killed by police, whether they’re armed or not.
…victims were unarmed in 1 in 6 (753;16%) fatal shootings. Rates among unarmed Black and Hispanic victims were significantly higher than they were among White victims: more than 3 times as high and 45% higher, respectively.
As to your pointed question - I want to be on the side of history that puts an end to daily mass murder events. Which side of history do you want to be on?
From 1917 to today, over 37 million people have been killed by fascist and Marxist dictators. Disarmament of the public is a favored preemptive tactic that they employ. I intend to be on the side of history that isn’t so victimized.
The link you shared is great evidence that our police forces, local, state, and federal, need to be disarmed. An armed police officer is significantly more dangerous than an armed civilian.
Sweetie, if you identify with the wife beating man child who blames everyone but himself for his DV charge, that probably says something about you.
I was responding to the person above who said “Most of these commenters have only ever seen guns on the news, in the hands of criminals, who obviously don’t give a shit about these new laws.” I was sharing the experiences I’ve had with semiautomatic pistol owners.
But I’m ever so sorry if you feel you are a part of the group I was disapproving of and it gave you a sad. Please don’t come to my house and shoot me 🙏 🥺
It’s unreasonable because you’re talking about taxing an enumerated right. Should we add a tax on social media users to cover the costs of misinformation? What about religious observance, should churchgoers pay sales tax on their tithes for the privilege of worshipping?
Weapon ownership is a right, not a privilege. The government cannot tax a right.
Weapons taxes have always been illegal, due to their infringing nature. Where do we draw the line on the taxation of protected rights, though? Regardless of the blatantly illegal nature of the particular tax in question, it is a slippery slope that we would be wise to reverse course on before it’s too late.
Do only rich people deserve guns?
Do the most vulnerable people in society not deserve a means of self defense or self sufficiency when you consider the demographics of lower earners?
What is the spirit of this legislation - what kind of person is supposed to be targeted by this? What kind of person actually commits gun violence?
Removed by mod
That’s all well and good, maybe guns are inherently problematic. But since no one is paying attention to my wording I’ll just say it:
Right wingers and neo-fascists commit the majority of gun violence in this country and will absolutely never give them up. They are not the poor and unsophisticated rednecks you’re told they are, they tend to be richer than average and their brand of violence is calculated. Many of them are current and former police officers and therefore won’t take their friends’ guns away just because the law says so.
If you’re poor you’re less likely to be white and straight and therefore more likely to be harassed or killed by the aforementioned groups.
This is not me saying that it’s time to give up on gun control laws or that we need more guns. Fewer guns in the US will mean a more peaceful country. I’m saying that laws that simply make it more expensive to buy and own guns will not deter violent people from buying them because they impose no restrictions on them.
Can you support your assertion that right wingers and neo-fascists commit the majority of gun violence in this country? I realize how much of the info around this subject is propaganda so I like to look at the data whenever I can find it?
Most shootings are in big cities. Please don’t spread your brain washing.
Removed by mod
It’s about rebuilding schools with money from people who buy guns and bullets, instead of general tax money.
I can’t wait to see the faces of all you freedom hating dipshits when this and many other gun control efforts are appealed and fail the new Bruen standard.
HA HA motherfuckers. Gun rights are winning no matter what you try.
Lmao. Freedom hating. Gotta have that freedom to murder each other. How would we survive without it.
If you attack the rights of Americans, you must hate freedom. I support all of our rights, for all Americans, and if you don’t then you suck.
Oh look, an edgy teen who read Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas (or let’s be real, probably just watched the movie) for the first time.
I bet you were inspired to be a “gonzo journalist” too, right?
LOL what a swing and a miss. I read all of Thompson’s books in the 90s, probably before you were born. Except Kingdom of Fear, that came out this century.
You think this is some kind of win lol, it just makes you look more sad and cringe.
Who cares what you think? Your lame comments won’t stop me from doing what I do.
The day a conservative talks to me about freedom and I don’t laugh in their face is the day I’ve gone completely fucking stupid.
Conservatives have zero credibility on freedom.
Even the Second Amendment is a liberal invention, which conservatives had to rewrite and ignore history, and even certain parts of the Second Amendment itself, in order to fetishize it as they do.
I’m not a “conservative” as the neocon and trumptard groups have taken over that label with their brands of madness.
I’m an Independant who pretty much hates all of the politicians we have. I only vote for those who do not propose to limit any of our freedoms.
As an Independant and having been politically active since the prior century, I have mountains of credibility on the subject of Freedom. I was here protesting the PATRIOT Act, the Afghanistan and Iraq wars, the endless War on Terror, and the War on Drugs probably when you were a baby. I was against those wars when Obama continued them too. I voted against Trump 3 times.
So yeah, go on about my credibility if you want to but you have nothing on me.
Well, you’re taking a modern conservative view on the Second Amendment. That view is based on lies. So no you don’t have credibility as far as that is concerned.
Imagine being this person ^
Oof…
I am that person, and I have a great life and am proud to support all rights for all Americans. If you don’t then you suck.
Imagine being the kind of fucking dumbass that would try to reduce any Rights that people have.
Right… But only when it comes to guns. Trans people though? They don’t deserve anything.
Nope, you’re making up absolute bullshit again. I said ALL RIGHTS FOR ALL AMERICANS you fucking asshole.
Most uses of firearms in the US are not self-defense. But funnily enough, if there were fewer guns… there’d be fewer need for those few self-defense cases.
Offensive uses and suicides to defensive uses: 50 to 1.
Citation: Needed.
According to Gun Violence Archive in 2023 so far there have been 888 deaths due to defensive use of firearms, out of a total of 31,900 deaths from firearms from all causes. That’s 2.78%, which is about a 36:1 ratio.
So yeah- most firearm-caused deaths in the US are not from self-defense, and it’s not even close either.
That’s a nice figure you have there. Would be a shame if somebody thought about the context of those numbers…
Like how many defensive gun uses occur where nobody is killed because the attacker was deterred without the necessity of violence. You don’t have numbers for that because they only count deaths.
Why, when I said
while linking to the stats to show deaths from firearms in the US, would I say anything about non-lethal defensive uses of firearms? The point was to show the ratio of self-defensive lethal uses of firearms compared to all lethal uses of firearms.
Except you didn’t. You said “uses of firearms” which also includes sport and hunting as well as self defense. What you actually said is completely false and then you just lied and pretended you said something completely different. You also posted a ridiculously biased and incomplete propaganda site as a valid source of fact, probably because any remotely academic source would give the exact opposite. Even the CDC found that defensive uses far outnumber offensive uses before gun control groups forced them to delete the peer reviewed data for political reasons.
What I said: Self-defense is a minority of gun usage in the US (a fact you and I both agree on).
The first commenter said that offensive and suicides outnumber self-defense (which eliminates sport from the discussion).
What I said next: If you count deaths, then self-defense makes up a minority of firearm-related deaths (and yes, I did use deaths because that’s an easier to track statistic than “people who used a gun in an assault/defense but nobody was hurt.” However, even if tracking that is possible, it’d be unreasonable to assume it’d change the ratio in any meaningful way.)
Furthermore, GVA’s lists their methodology here. Of course an organization devoted to stopping gun violence would be biased towards stopping gun violence, but that doesn’t make them wrong. Feel free to point out where their methodology is flawed.
You got a source for that claim from a reputable news organization? Cause all I’m seeing is “CDC allegedly removed report” headlines from various far-right sites.
Lmao. You didn’t say deaths chief.
Yeah you can go on about the semantics, but what I said was still relevant to the overall picture of the situation. Ideally the numbers of deaths from all sources would be low, but in reality they won’t ever be. When self defense can save lives, it’s worth noting its value.
Comparing defense and offensive deaths is apples and oranges. The goal in a defense use of a gun isn’t to kill.
In reality in every other civilized country they are now. So…
Bro just stop already. You like guns, it’s a neat little hobby, and you’re getting angry because people want to end it. I get that. My hobby is retro video games/consoles, and if it turned out that they were a threat to society and people wanted to take them away, I probably wouldn’t do the sane/rational/adult thing and accept it. I’d fight to defend my god given right to own a Wii, and I’d get into angry bad faith arguments on the internet in a desperate attempt to protect my cherished pastime.
…but I’d be wrong, I’d be an asshole, and I probably wouldn’t realize it. I like to think that I’d have the self-awareness to not fall into that trap, since I generally consider myself to be self-aware, but also I really love this hobby and it’s a big part of my life, so it could go either way.
Nope, I will never stop. It’s not about “a hobby” it’s about the rights of all Americans.
If any of you had any fucking perspective, you’d realize that our rights are something that millions have died to obtain and it’s absolutely moronic to give any of them up.
I would definitely say something very similar if the guberment went after ma 'tendos.
Your perspective is based on lies though.
You’re the delusional moron from yesterday.
Easy answer to both questions: gun owners
No one deserves a gun.
There, no need to even read the rest.
Don’t waste your time. People here aren’t looking for a rational discussion. This is the “shit on anyone who values their own safety” thread. Most of these commenters have only ever seen guns on the news, in the hands of criminals, who obviously don’t give a shit about these new laws.
I used to have to listen to my neighbor doing target practice with his semiautomatic pistol until his stepdaughter took a secret video of him beating the shit out of her mom and gave it to her teacher. He got all his most favoritest fancy boy toys taken away and now I just have to listen to him loudly fussing about it and blaming everyone but himself for it happening.
He’s an Olympic level cunt muffin with no sense of personal responsibility or care for the safety of others. Everyone I know who owns semiautomatic weapons is pretty much the exact same garbage personality type. Or a cop.
Everyone in the neighborhood is now safer because that fucktard can’t go blowing holes in his walls when he gets scared at night.
Maybe you should keep better company.
You have just described the process of making yourself prejudiced. Does it feel nice to know that you harbor prejudice against your fellow American citizens, millions of us?
Waaaaaaah someone else doesn’t liiiiiike me. My heteronormative Christian toxic masculine riiiiiiiights, you’re preeeeeejudiceddddddd. Waaaaaaaahhhhh.
That’s you. That’s what you sound like.
Cops, white people, men, and christians have all the fucking power in the US.
Interestingly enough, most gun control laws disproportionately disarm people who aren’t in the demographics you listed. In fact, historically, gun control has usually been used to disarm minorities so they can more easily be intimidated, harassed, and murdered. Which side of history are you on? The side that empowers minorities, or the side that disarms them and prevents them from choosing any path other than victimization?
Yeah, that needs a citation. I’ve heard this point parroted time and again, but never have seen data demonstrating it.
Minorities are getting killed by police, whether they’re armed or not.
BMJ, Fatal Police Shootings, 2020
As to your pointed question - I want to be on the side of history that puts an end to daily mass murder events. Which side of history do you want to be on?
From 1917 to today, over 37 million people have been killed by fascist and Marxist dictators. Disarmament of the public is a favored preemptive tactic that they employ. I intend to be on the side of history that isn’t so victimized.
The link you shared is great evidence that our police forces, local, state, and federal, need to be disarmed. An armed police officer is significantly more dangerous than an armed civilian.
Where’s your data?
Couldn’t give half a shit what you think about it. I’m enjoying my privilege here regardless.
Sweetie, if you identify with the wife beating man child who blames everyone but himself for his DV charge, that probably says something about you.
I was responding to the person above who said “Most of these commenters have only ever seen guns on the news, in the hands of criminals, who obviously don’t give a shit about these new laws.” I was sharing the experiences I’ve had with semiautomatic pistol owners.
But I’m ever so sorry if you feel you are a part of the group I was disapproving of and it gave you a sad. Please don’t come to my house and shoot me 🙏 🥺
That’s what you said that I was responding to specifically. None of the other stuff is relevant to anybody but your shitty neighbors.
Bro, it’s a matter of fundamental fairness. The cost of gun violence must be borne by the gun industry and gun owners.
Period.
Not innocent civilians, not tax payers at large.
E: only to abject morons could this comment seem unreasonable.
It’s unreasonable because you’re talking about taxing an enumerated right. Should we add a tax on social media users to cover the costs of misinformation? What about religious observance, should churchgoers pay sales tax on their tithes for the privilege of worshipping?
Weapon ownership is a right, not a privilege. The government cannot tax a right.
Is there an enumerated right to be free of taxes on enumerated rights? If not, there isn’t one.
There are all sorts of taxes and fees associated with free speech and assembly, petitioning government, freedom of information act.
Don’t you already pay fees for firearms permits?
Fees are different than taxes. The reason for the fees (background checks, etc) are illegal per the 2nd Amendment, but they aren’t the same.
A weapon tax is the same as a poll tax, or imagine if you had to pay a tax to exercise your 4th or 5th amendment rights.
None of this is acceptable.
Uhh, poll taxes are expressly banned by the Constitution. They were not illegal prior to that amendment.
Weapons taxes have always been illegal, due to their infringing nature. Where do we draw the line on the taxation of protected rights, though? Regardless of the blatantly illegal nature of the particular tax in question, it is a slippery slope that we would be wise to reverse course on before it’s too late.
So blatantly illegal it was just signed into law.
Ever hear of cognitive dissonance?
Ever hear of judicial review? Illegal laws are passed all the time and later struck down by courts–just like this one will be.
Bro, this is a capitalist country. If you want something, pull yourself up by those bootstraps and go earn some money to buy it.