• Taalnazi@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    16
    ·
    edit-2
    2 days ago

    If you think before posting, ask yourself: is it normal to break into people’s homes?

    And even then, here we don’t worry about criminals with guns that much. The USA is idiotic in that regard, with its pervasive gun culture, resulting in weekly mass shootings.

    • Alk@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      2 days ago

      I didn’t ask to be born in a country where burglars are likely to have firearms. But now that I am, I have to react to that fact myself.

      • Flax@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        I am pro gun control, but if I lived in the USA, I’d own a gun. My opinions are for the ballot box and don’t matter whenever someone is breaking into my house and threatening the lives of my wife and my children.

        • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          21 seconds ago

          I’m against gun control generally, live in the US, and don’t own a gun. Why? The chance that my kids find my guns and play with them causing a tragedy is much higher than the chance I’ll need to use a gun. Crime is incredibly low in my area, with the most pressing crime on my neighbors’ minds being a “break-in” (nobody locks their doors) several years before we moved in by akid in the neighborhood, and we’ve been here >10 years without any incidents.

          So yeah, guns are more of a liability for me than a useful tool. However, not everyone lives in my area, so need for guns absolutely varies by area. I’d absolutely prefer an armed populace to the government having a monopoly on guns.

          I do agree w/ sensible restrictions, and most mass shootings would be averted if we actually enforced the laws we have. Most of the time, someone close to the shooter knew they were a risk yet did nothing.

          Most firearm deaths are either gang related or suicides. The solution there isn’t banning guns, but solving the underlying problems. For those, I support:

          • drug legalization - cuts down on incarceration, which should reduce conversions to organized crime
          • cash redistribution - my preference is NIT, which is similar to UBI; helps prevent people from getting desperate
          • reform prison system to focus on rehabilitation instead of punishment - maybe prisons get funded based on reduced recidivism?

          IMO, guns aren’t the problem, they’re a tool. We need to solve the actual problems instead of putting kid gloves on everyone.

          • Flax@feddit.uk
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            7 minutes ago

            Why? The chance they my kids find my guns and play with them causing a tragedy is much higher than the chance I’ll need to use a gun. Crime is incredibly low in my area, with the most pressing crime on my neighbors’ minds being a “break-in” (nobody locks their doors) several years before we moved in by akid in the neighborhood, and we’ve been here >10 years without any incidents.

            Valid. But it’s different if you are a transgender person living by yourself (i have heard and don’t question the claim that transgender people in some areas may have their lives threatened)

            most mass shootings would be averted if we actually enforced the laws we have.

            Wasn’t there a school shooting in America where the police tried to “contain” the shooter instead of confronting him? By contain, leave him in a class of kids.

    • Flax@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      2 days ago

      If you think before posting, ask yourself: is it normal to break into people’s homes?

      No. It’s incredibly disturbing behaviour, and in the USA they are likely armed as well. They’re not going to nicely ask you not to resist them. That’s why you need to have a gun so you can shoot them before they shoot you.

      • Taalnazi@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        2 days ago

        With that mindset everyone will have guns, so violence then actually increases.

        The only answer is to dearm everyone.

        • Alk@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 days ago

          Yeah, I think we’re all in agreement about that here. But everyone isn’t disarmed. I won’t give up my gun until I know with 99% certainty that your average burglar won’t get a hold of an illegal firearm.

        • Flax@feddit.uk
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 days ago

          In most of the UK, even the average police officer isn’t armed. (In Northern Ireland, the average police officer is armed, but the amount of times the firearms are ever actually fired is incredibly rare. Most of the time they go off is actually negligent. When they do go off, they are always investigated.)

          The problem is, how do you disarm the bad guys when you’ve been giving them guns without tracking them for decades