Is that guy Assange?
they dont have a problem letting fascist ideology fester under the guise of “free speech” (i.e preventing class conciousness). they have a problem when the mass shooter commits the crime on their own soil but at the same time celebrate the soldier who does it abroad. citizens could freely own guns in a socialist society and there would be little to no casualties
enver hoxha tungjatjeta
I try to see from the perspective of a liberal sometimes and in this arena the feeling I end with is always defeatism. Like let’s say that gun control is somehow a good solution to the problem. Maybe limiting access to guns turns out to be significant impediment that reduces the number of shootings each year by half. Even then who is going to implement this gun control? I don’t know any Democrat who done more than paying lip service to this issue. Even if some committed Democrat goes for this, the effects will probably limited to their state. That leaves like half the red states which have no chance of enacting gun control ever. Then there’s the fact that NRA exists and is huge and has more effect on policy than any Democrat politician. I don’t know how you advocate for gun control as a meaningful strategy then. It’s doesn’t even look possible as a small step towards broader change.
Even then who is going to implement this gun control?
That’s the ugly materialism kicking in, commie. When we outlaw guns every single felon and criminal that has one will immediately go down to the police station and turn it in; you just don’t understand economic incentive tankie.
Nah in seriousness that was literally the biggest problem with any form of liberal gun-control I’ve seen in democrat states. Sheriffs never fucking enforce it, so wtf is the point?
To be honest even liberals probably know this in the back of their minds now. Gun control was a hot topic under Obama but since Trump all that energy has been reallocated to getting the cheeto out of the white house (with no success).
They’ll just point at Australia as a shining example and not sweat the details. If you press on the details of how to go about this, they’ll get angry and say that you want the shithole to continue to kill kids.
Likewise, most who support this route are vocal, but otherwise politically passive. I think at least some of this is because they don’t even know where to begin with organizing, but also, they are afraid to take action. The lack of education in history and how to go about organizing change is a big part of the defeatism. The other part is the magical, idealist thinking.
Im australian and our gun policy worked because after a massacre where a lot of people died both of our mahor parties said this sucks we can do something about this and they did.
In america you couldn’t even get one party to agree to it.
Funny enough the recent Bondi massacre led to gun laws 2.0 and was not met with anything resembling bipartisanship.
It seems to be a culture thing where guns are way too tied into american culture.
It seems to be a culture thing where guns are way too tied into american culture.
I wish I could remember now where I read it for a source (maybe it was something posted on here), but I have this memory of reading about how in early US, part of the way the genocidal colonialism stuff was carried out, was individual / mercenary-like “rangers” who would murder natives. So that’s already one reason for a culture of individual weapon ownership/access (whether guns factored in much back then, I’m not as sure about). Then there’s the history of chattel slavery. That could easily be another reason, to aid in threatening/controlling slaves, though I don’t know how many slave owners also owned guns. And there’s the heavily rural aspects of the region’s geography, with wildlife that can pose threats; this may not be as much of a thing now, with how much capitalism builds things out, but I’m sure still matters if you live in one of those “middle of nowhere” country places.
Then in modern day, there is the NRA and its lobbying, there is mass media (movies, games, etc.) that fetishize gun/weapon ownership. And of course the constitution itself, where there is some contention over what the second amendment actually means/meant, but some people believe very strongly that it’s a fundamental right to individual gun ownership; usually more so among reactionaries, from what I can tell. It’s convenient in a way for militant leftists, but I’m also not sure how much it’s worth if the state can hunt you like a dog with military-grade weaponry and surveillance. As we’re seeing in global conflicts, drone warfare is a significant thing now; up close firefights with guns still matter, but seems they matter less than they used to.
That said, MeowZedong makes a great point that US policy typically has little to do with what is popular/unpopular among the people. So it may be something of a red herring to think the culture is what’s holding back change there.
Yeah, it’s not taken seriously here at all, even by those who want gun control. Doesn’t help that corporate lobbying is what decides all of our laws.
There is definitely a cultural aspect to some people wanting guns, but I don’t think that’s the actual reason they aren’t going anywhere. What the people want has very little impact on what happens in the US.
You are also an island nation far away from any others where it is much easier to control imports and domestic manufacturing. Here we have two huge land borders and massive sea borders close to quite a few neighboring countries. Smuggling happens constantly and it is impossible to stop; even if we banned all guns tomorrow the cartels and gangs would still have them.
I don’t think that the kids who shoot up their schools are getting their guns and ammo from cartels. Mass shootings and organized crime are mostly separate things.
Well yeah, kids who shoot up schools by and large get the firearms from their parents and the parents get them via legal means.
What I’m saying is that even if we banned guns tomorrow, an immediate and massive black market would spring up overnight based on trafficked guns, stolen guns, 300 million firearms already in circulation that would be sold privately in cash, etc. because the demand wouldn’t go away and it’s physically impossible to cut off the supply. What Australia did simply wouldn’t work in the US for a lot of material reasons even if it was legislatively feasible, which it is not.
I don’t think that the kids who shoot up their schools are getting their guns and ammo from cartels.
As someone who grew up in a slum, guns were always easily accessible and pretty damn cheap (80 bucks for a shitty glock circa 2007). Even if you were to totally restrict guns, the amount of firearms in circulation already in the U.S would last for decades.
Also, most kids get it from their parents. I’m willing to bet most of the guns are family-passed or bought for cheap from a buddy. Follow that chain long enough and I’m willing to bet there is smuggling involved somewhere down the line.
Not to dismiss your childhood, but guns are straight up sold at Walmart. For most people there’s no need to seek out anything sketchy when the legal route is so accessible.
I agree that it’ll be an ordeal to eliminate all the guns that are in circulation across the country, but that isn’t necessary to stamp down on mass shootings. A crumb of gun control would, at the minimum, go a long way towards keeping schools safe since the only people targeting those are other children.
Not to dismiss your childhood, but guns are straight up sold at Walmart.
Not in some states/counties. Also, for adults, yea
