In my experience, overly fearful people that get terrified over nothing are the primary audience for gun ownership. The mindset it takes to responsibly own and carry a gun is RARE.
I have 60+ year old relatives that suddenly all decided they wanted a gun, just because one of them bought one and won’t shut up about the confidence it gives her. She literally bought it just to walk to and from her car, which is parked directly in front of the business SHE owns, despite there being absolutely zero crime happening in her parking lot, and not bothering to set up security cameras. She literally bought a gun because she was afraid of a non-existent problem, and made no non-violent effort to correct the issue. I’m waiting for her to shoot some poor homeless person asking for change…
If owning a gun makes you confident, then you’re a scared little baby. Especially the guys with big trucks that drive like they’re trying to provoke people. I KNOW you have a gun. You bought the little dick pride set, so there’s no way you don’t have a gun. Quit trying to make excuses to pull it out. Pussies. FYI, I’m driving slow in front of you BECAUSE you’re driving like an ass hole and riding my bumper. Wave your gun at me again. I do not care.
Unfortunately, as you get older and closer to death, fear becomes a big factor in your life. This is the reaction you see from boomers. They can’t verbalize or even comprehend the fear of death, so it manifests in these bizarre behavioral patterns.
No, this is just boomers. They were exposed to lead their entire lives and emotional disregulation is one of the consequences. They were done dirty by their parent’s and grandparent’s generation.
You hang out with the wrong crowd. I’ve belonged to several gun clubs over the years, of the many hundreds of people I’ve gotten to know, I’ve met probably a dozen who fit the profile you describe. IMO the difference is socialization: if guns are a right but at the same time you make guns a taboo and actively discourage organized events and interest shooting sports, the people who do not go into it with a healthy mind and diverse social life end up dwelling on whatever someone feeds them for clicks and ad revenue (Fox News and similar shit, not even partisan just scary news gets clicks and trains fear into people). Shooting is fun if you do it right.
Answer this: how do you work on legislation to ensure responsible gun ownership with someone who detests any form of civilian gun ownership and absolutely refuses to learn the intricacies? How do you collaborate with someone who thinks themselves to be above understanding what they’re working on? Sensible things HAVE been proposed by people with a deep understanding of guns, but they get spit on because they’re something other than another ban on an inconsequential feature or function or type of something.
Edit to add: I cannot count the number of times I’ve given someone a chance and nearly every time the answer to “are you open to the possibility of your side being wrong about anything at all” is along the lines of me being the one who needs to be schooled by someone with zero firearms experience about why banning some specific things will solve mass shootings. On the other hand, I’ve taken many anti gun people shooting, and taught them some basics, and that changed a lot about how they viewed what they’d previously been told. Internet scholars will say this invalidates their ability to be objective and so their opinion no longer counts.
The evidence, that is total intolerance to the actual ideas and proposals by gun owners, and pushing for more of the same that didn’t work the first few times, shows that legislators actual objectives are total disarmament, not the safety and lives of good people.
Ah yes, the true test of what’s right: how many people’s preconceptions your words appeal to. Perhaps we should have have an AI stroke our egos instead of communicating with other humans.
It’s such a shame Americans brains are completely dysfunctional when it comes to guns. Despite literally overwhelming evidence that guns are a errible, terrible idea to be so easily accessible. Somehow what you you’d usually call a socially progressive person becomes more like a raving lunatic to most others outside of the USA when it comes to guns…
It’s honestly a fascinating phenomenon, it’s just really, really tragic.
Hanging out with the wrong crowd? It’s my family. And about half of them aren’t even Republicans. If anything, THEY hang out with the wrong crowd. And considering that you make guns such a large part of your identity, even making it a regular social interaction, I have a hard time believing that you’ll look at it from anyone else’s perspective. I especially doubt your ability to judge who should and shouldn’t have a gun, because you literally go to clubs full of people and judge their ability to responsibly own a gun off of their social skills, which for many people is a facade they create to seem normal. I doubt that the guy who’s excited to kill people is talking about it like that at club time. And my problem isn’t just intent. My problem with my family, specifically, is that they’re all a bunch of scared little bitches who are going to shoot at the first thing that scares their precious little baby asses. And I’ve met a shitload of fearful gun owners. I grew up in the South. Saying you’ve only met a dozen, means that you don’t pay attention, you excuse more than you should, or you’re just lying.
What makes you think it’s so central to my identity? (Granted I’ve got way more hobbies than most people, I’m sure it’s an innocent assumption.)
We might have different ways of judging people. I learned to judge character long before I ever touched my first gun (as an adult), and do not defer or equate a person’s identity to their character.
Yeah people lie, but in the orgs I belong to everyone has the keys and full access to nice facilities, and is treated like an adult - consider that a litmus test, or a baseline level of trust which is exceedingly rare to have someone break. You think fearful people just sign up to be on a “cold” range (unarmed) where someone else is running around with a loaded gun (e.g. USPSA), and submit fully to whoever’s running the range that day? Or join the club at the police or military range? There’s way more fear at the universities (and I live at one of the biggest right now).
Yeah I’m not in the south, only ever lived in big cities that are as blue as it gets.
Yeah. I want a gun. Specifically I’d love to have a bolt action rifle I can use as a long range hole punch on some papers and cans. And I can definitely afford it. I don’t have it because I don’t have the free disposable income for it, a secure and sturdy gun safe, and the space for it.
If I thought for a second that I needed a pistol to walk around town I shouldn’t have one. The only times I even consider owning a gun for conflict is when the proud boys occupy a nearby city that I do stuff in regularly. They’re holding semi automatic rifles and it may be valuable for a counter fascist militia to march against them. But I’m not a good shot and that’s expensive and I can’t go to prison.
Guns are not therapy. They aren’t Xanax or Wellbutrin or buspirone or anything else that will actually fix irrational fear. They are a device that exists solely to put a hole in something far away, and often they’re designed for that thing to be a living animal or person.
I’m sure this guy did fear for his life. I am sure he did feel like the safest thing he could do in that moment for himself was to fire directly into the unknown car.
And that’s why he doesn’t belong in our society. He is not welcome to participate given that the above is true, and we need to remove him until the end of time to ensure that no such thing can ever happen again.
I say that as a firearm owner and manufacturer. Anytime somebody asks me about my guns I explain to them how any 13-year-old could have done the same thing and how are gun laws are completely broken
You can be pro gun in pro regulation at the same time, fuck all these false dichotomies
Minimum 25 years actually in a prison +/- some minor adjustments for behavior and then he’ll be eligible to request release on parole. But if parole isn’t granted there’s no upper limit on how long he can continue to spend in prison.
So not sure what your problem is…the person I was originally replying to thought 25 to life wasn’t an actual sentence in the US. I was correcting that misunderstanding originally.
Then you came in sideways and off topic about it being a justifiable sentence for his crime. I assumed you were commenting in good faith and were confused about my use of quotes around justice. So I responded to that. But if you’re just looking to be a jerk can you do it on like Facebook or something?
You said “justice” system, as if 25 to life wasn’t “just”. It is, and it’s easy to understand.
Pretty rude that you respond to a misunderstanding on an open forum by being toxic and trying to gatekeep the platform, as if only your view, understanding and discussion is above reproach.
A classic thing that happens on Lemmy is people focus on systemic issues when in a thread about a very specific part of a system. I was replying to the specific relationship between 25 to life, and “justice”.
You whiffed then lashed out but whatever,none of this matters.
I straightened out the “justice” misunderstanding before you came at me sideways about how you don’t like to shit? I don’t think 25 to life was unjust in his case and I didn’t think it was so you can pack up your “it’s easy to understand” toxicity and miss me with it. I was replying to someone who is likely not from the US or doesn’t understand our sentencing.
I lashed out? You started the sarcastic toxic trolling behavior with a comment that was unrelated to the conversation I was having with someone else, then continued it in a follow on comment when I tried to straighten out the misunderstanding…in what world did you not start the issue here? It’s not gatekeepers lemmy to ask you to take your toxic trolling behavior elsewhere.
If you’re a troll I do hope you go back to Facebook. If you somehow genuinely don’t think you’re a troll then I hope you develop the ability use basic insight to reflect on how you come off socially.
That pig (with18 previous brutality complaints, two convictions and a totat of ~$9M Minneapolis taxpayer money settlements) who murdered George Flloyd got 22 years.
Oh I guess I misunderstood You’re totally right 25 years seems absolutely fine for somebody to shoot a stranger for accidentally pulling in the driveway My bad. We really all should just shoot strangers when they pull in our driveway and be back out on the street and 25 years. Seems the right thing to do.
Oh I guess I misunderstood You’re totally right 25 years seems absolutely fine for somebody to shoot a stranger for accidentally pulling in the driveway My bad. We really all should just shoot strangers when they pull in our driveway and be back out on the street and 25 years. Seems the right thing to do.
I didn’t say that. I explained that the sentence he received, 25 to life, is the maximum allowed under New York State law. I have no interest whatsoever in defending things I did not say. So you can stop wasting your time, you aren’t going to goad me into defending a position I never claimed to hold just because you’re looking to argue with someone. We’re done here.
They are defending themselves for having a gun, probably because the feel guilty for having one at their core or feel like others will judge them for it
Yeah I think there is a bit of a disconnect with gun people. Some people are purely about self defense, some people are just genuine enthusiasts, and then there is the group of people who like to pretend they are part of the first two groups but really seem to have a lust for blood - be it fear (someone rings the door bell, or mistakenly drives down the driveway), perceived persecution, political ideology or just downright racist shit.
Antigun people seem to think everyone who likes guns is part of the last crazy group. It’s a bit hard to really tell who is who sometimes, but it’s definitely impossible to keep the guns out of the crazies hands.
Yes, they have no business carrying a deadly weapon. I’m not minimizing the crime nor the impact on the victim, quite the contrary. Unless there’s a serious reason to expect recurrence and law enforcement is no help, you’re giving a traumatized untrained person a deadly weapon. You’re setting that victim up to murder an innocent person.
How is this person any different than you hypothetical rape victim? I don’t know why he may have been living in fear, but having a deadly weapon just meant that a traumatized untrained person murdered an innocent person.
I assume many rape victims, and many other people are traumatized. I assume they may act out of fear.
I assume the likelihood of anyone defending themselves from an actual threat is very low, especially someone acting out of fear, especially someone untrained. They’re not likely to be making rational, responsible choices, nor able to reliably do what they intend. You’re just trading one problem for another
I assume someone 3D printing a weapon is a stupid edge case. Very few people can do it, it’s unlikely to work well, more likely to injure the user. Most importantly no one is 3D printing a gun on impulse, emotion, fear
protecting yourself from a tyrannical government is completely unrealistic, and you could argue already here. Governments will always have many orders of magnitude more resources than you, many more deadly weapons, and many more practiced killers. Most importantly we’re no longer in a time when most of the governments weapons are people bringing their own musket. It’s more important than ever to defend against a tyrannical government, but frightened people shooting anyone who turns around in their driveway or knocks on their door is not the way to do it.
2 & 3.) How do you know they didn’t receive help/treatment? Also, you can’t just assume that every person is the same, most people go out of their way to get proper training to use a firearm.
4.) No, it’s gotten way easier, there are blueprints everywhere online freely available and guides on how to make 3D printed guns at home.
5.) Why did the USA pull out of Afghanistan then? We have the best military in the world, yet we couldn’t beat the people who live in the desert that had basically nothing? Urbanization is a nightmare in any war. In the end, it doesn’t matter how many resources they have. You have to remember that people in the military have friends and family back home, there would be a lot of internal conflict. Also, If we leave the people defenseless, we’ll end up just like China and Russia.
Just because you have a firearm doesn’t make you part of the “gun people” generalization.
Do you fantasize about getting to shoot your gun? Have you tied your identity to your arsenal of guns? Do you feel the need to open carry at the grocery store? Do you open fire on cars in your driveway?
No? Then you’re not in the “gun people” group being talked about. People who own guns are not the same as the “gun people”, or “gun nuts”/“ammosexuals”.
Just because you have a firearm doesn’t make you part of the “gun people” generalization.
Actually that’s kinda exactly what it means when people say “all gun owners blah blah blah.”
Do you fantasize about getting to shoot your gun? Have you tied your identity to your arsenal of guns? Do you feel the need to open carry at the grocery store? Do you open fire on cars in your driveway?
No, no, concealed (especially after Buffalo), and the last one is called “crime.”
No? Then you’re not in the “gun people” group being talked about. People who own guns are not the same as the “gun people”, or “gun nuts”/“ammosexuals”.
Disagree. If I say all women are sluts, but then some nun says “well I’m not,” I can’t claim I wasn’t talking about “all women” when I said “all women.” It’s preposterous. By that same coin, when someone says “all gun owners,” they can’t claim to "only be talking about the bad ones.” One should instead be more specific, like say “irresponsible gun owners blah blah blah,” if one wishes to make the distinction between “all” and “bad.”
*Disclaimer: No, I don’t believe all women are sluts, I was using it as an example of a stupid generalization specifically. I shouldn’t have to add this disclaimer, but we all know I have to before some cheesedick decides that was my argument and argues with a strawman.
They didn’t say “all gun owners” they said “gun people” which to anyone with awareness can infer it means the people who tie their identity to their weapons.
What a shitty analogy to women, I’m not even going to touch that.
Would it have been clearer if the original comment said “irresponsible gun people”, sure, but it wasn’t and self-centered people want to be the victim when they haven’t understood they aren’t even in the group.
I’m Dutch and even I could glean the intended meaning from the context.
Yeah so if I say “woman people” I’m not talking about all of them, only a specific subsect that I failed to describe, and then I’m confused why people think I’m generalizing?
C’mon, “gun people” is a clear generalization that clearly implies “all gun owners.” He could’ve said “irresponsible gun owners” to single out those who he wished to refer to, but he didn’t, thus the “confusion.” If it was actually his wish to single out those people, actually doing so in the future would help his posts not be misunderstood.
Lol yes, don’t bother touching how dumb generalizations are, make them instead.
So you’re telling me that making generalizations about a group is good, and if someone in that group feels like the generalization is unfair and doesn’t reflect them or reality, they should stop being a snowflake? You by chance voting for an orange this election?
Ah, Dutch, that explains it. The Dutch love to generalize.
Dude, people get unreasonably pissy about that. I don’t know why. For instance, there are several houses around here with big “No U Turns In Driveway!” or similar signage to the same effect, which all have like 4 foot long driveways in locations where I can’t imagine anyone would be looking for a spot to turn around anyway.
Motherfuckers must be paranoid. It’s got to be exhausting, being so spooked all the time.
Devil’s avocado: People used to turn around in my driveway all the time at my old house. If they stayed on the pavement, that’d be one thing. But half of them cut into the grass, and it turned it into and stayed a rutted, muddy mess.
Granted, I would never start taking pot shots at people turning, but I did put up a sign.
Thus the giant rocks I see on either side of the end of some driveways. Possible car damage seems to be a helpful deterrent to driving through the grass.
To prevent people from parking in front of and blocking my driveway, which happens often due to the location, I cast some traffic cones out of concrete and spaced them so parallel parking anything larger than a motorcycle is impossible but you can pull in between them nose first or in reverse. They weigh 180 pounds each, and look squishy… until you strike them with a vehicle.
Watching morons clonk into them is hilarious. But they seldom do it twice.
There is some legitimate reasons for it, but not likely to ever be the case. Larger vehicles may damage their driveway if it’s older or not as well built. So it works for their sedan, but an f-150 or a EV could irreparably damage it. People wouldn’t ever think of that, it’s like driving on their grass basically. Who does that?
It’s their private property, they do have a right to protect from damage from people entering it, but not to death.
Lol if a F150 or EV damages your “driveway” it was never an actual driveway to begin with. As in, no it won’t damage a driveway. You’re thinking of a lawn.
Brooks said. The extra weight will affect everything from faster wear on residential streets and driveways to vehicle tires and infrastructure like parking garages.
Michael Brooks, executive director of the nonprofit Center for Auto Safety
How does this even make him qualified to be making such statements? Furthermore, my residential neighborhood is full of 25 year old driveways and big ass trucks like F350 diesels and nobody has damaged driveways.
You understand that some people cut corners and may not have the same quality of products yeah? That’s for them to decide, not you. Some people make their driveway out of paving stones FFS LMFAO.
And some counties have different codes and standards, maybe where you live it’s 6” slabs and it’s fine, but lots of places are 3.5” driveways dude. And lots of places cut corners dropping it to even 3” or less. Without engineers verifying, it’s a crapshoot. And no one wants to pay for that for a resi driveway.
Not everyone is going to have the same experiences as you lmfao.
Wear on road goes up by the fourth power. Do you have any idea what a fully loaded tractor trailer weighs? Consumer vehicles are not even a rounding error.
To, you know, build those houses you have those tractor trailers. And concrete trucks. In addition to transit buses, garbage trucks, moving and furniture trucks. Consumer vehicles are a rounding error.
Those are weight limited to feeder roads, only smaller versions of those can do down the actual residential roads. They aren’t built the same, no matter how much you want to claim and argue they are. Roads are built differently, and some have weight limits since the weight will absolutely destroy them.
When you order concrete, they can’t always send the large trucks, it can cost more to do work on residential streets since they need to batch more vehicles and more drivers. If you aren’t in the industry, you probably wouldn’t know this, but the road construction differences are all over the NHTSA website if you want to learn something.
Oh yeah no concrete trucks lol. Do you think they are weight limited to residential vehicles? Fucking lol. Doubt they could even do that empty. And you didn’t even touch all my other examples.
Dude at a certain point you have to admit you’re wrong and stop digging your hole. Seems you can’t here so cheers.
There’s more than one type of concert truck dude… there’s tractor trailer (won’t send on residential roads) and a bodyjob. Which are legal for residential roads. One can hold more, so it weighs more, and would damage those roads, so they get fined if they send large vehicles down them. This isn’t a lie, this is a fact lmfao. And you want to claim it’s not? Read the NHTSA legislation, it’s all right there for you in ways to digest format.
They have more tires that have a larger footprint so its weight is distributed more, that’s what matters, not the weight, the psi it exerts onto the ground. You would be surprised to find they exert less force overall than other vehicles, but I know you won’t ever believe this lmfao.
Theres is also weight limited roads. Did you not learn about these during drivers ed…?
See you have to keep drifting from EVs and F150s, fucking lol. Remember that was your first hole. Besides trying to effectively ignore, well, all my examples (because yes I am familiar with the concrete trucks used in residential construction). And driveways were covered with moving trucks and furniture trucks (fully loaded of course). Ok I really can’t keep correcting you all day. Cheers.
FYI it’s actually axle weight (that’s taken to the 4th power), that you don’t even know that while trying to present yourself as an authority says it all. Feel free to look it up. But you can’t spread it out enough over 3 to 4 to 5 axles to equal consumer vehicles. Not even close, and then the 4th power. That’s why consumer vehicles are not even a rounding error. Ok that’s it, really. Cheers.
For asphalt… for concrete it’s psi, which changes on the amount of tires per axle….
Driveways are typically concrete and roads are typically asphalt. You’re arguing different angles and points:
You’re conflating the two. It happens. This is why you should stick to one argument instead of trying to bring others in to make your point. You just conflate shit lol, there’s a reason why it’s considered a fallacy to do it.
Protect as in “put up a sign”, sure. But I can’t justify any amount of force to protect someone’s driveway.
If your driveway is damaged by using it as a driveway, then it’s already too late and you need a new one. You have no control over what delivery people are driving, or any number or legitimate public service workers who might need to stop at your house.
No delivery driver pulls up on driveways anywhere I have been, and you can request them not too as well. Lots will damage driveways due their weight (see below), so policy is to avoid for liability reasons.
And same as above for public service workers as well, you can request stuff too.
And that’s actually not true, lots of driveways aren’t able to handle EV weight, the standard 3.5-4” isn’t strong enough. It’ll damage very quickly. It’s not brought up enough to be honest.
Really? Our delivery drivers pull into the driveway all the time. Just had a FedEx truck in our driveway a few hours ago, in fact. Now that I think about it, Amazon trucks often stay at the street, but not always; my wife had to wait for one to leave the other day when she got home as Amazon was making a delivery.
Everyone but Amazon pulls into my driveway. I share a double wide driveway with the neighbours and the deliver drivers love it. Only time it’s been an issue was when a ambulance parked there for someone across the street and we couldn’t exit. Woe is me – someone is literally dying and I had a minor inconvenience. All in all, pretty happy with it.
EVs aren’t uniformly heavier than ice vehicles. Median weight is 2145kg vs 1768kg for ice. Your driveway should be able to hold around 8000 lbs, or 3600 kg. Basically the only ev you need to worry about is an electric Hummer.
And, again, if you feel your driveway can’t be used as a driveway, it’s already broken. The point of the thing is for people to put cars on it.
You’re welcome to put signs up on your own property for whatever you like, but you look silly getting upset for something like that.
It’s like putting up a sign demanding that people don’t knock on your door because if they do it’ll fall off the hinges. It’s your right, but don’t be surprised if people don’t look for the sign, and maybe just get something that isn’t broken.
Weird, because “googling it” shows that every source says otherwise.
Maybe you should check your recollection before spouting off about stuff so confidently.
If 300kg makes that big a difference, your driveway is broken. Do you think your driveway is permanently damaged by something as extreme as “two cars” being parked on it?
I have one of those signs along with beware of dogs. Living in the country there has been a ton of theft here, stopped once i got 2 dogs. People were pulling in grabbing stuff often the first few years here. Other issue is I have a narrow driveway and road, it a pain to back out and not go in the ditch or hit the mailbox. 500ft down the road is a turn around for the school bus, they can turn around there.
Side note, due to the unruly angry people that live in the country. Was taught as a kid to not use people's driveways for turning around, don't want to get shot.
I'm American, grew up being aware of the nuts with guns that live thier life in fear. Have had guns in my face so many times, it's no fear but frustration with theft. Living in the country you get shot at often for no reason
Having a gun for self defense fucks with your head. When my wife and I lived in a relatively rural area, I used to keep a shotgun under our bed for protection, but I eventually got rid of it. Never shot it a single time, but you’d better believe every time I cleaned it or moved it or just remembered I had it, I was imagining the horrible situation I might be forced to use it in. That shit low key fucked me up. Strange sound in the middle of the night? Better grab the gun.
I can’t even begin to imagine carrying one on me, especially in public. I like to think I have a pretty level head, but some people are just waiting for you to look at them the wrong way so they finally have that moment. So frightened or psychotic or some combination of the two that their first instinct is to just start shooting. Hell, my wife’s cousin-in-law got in a fucking shootout when he cut someone off in traffic.
Used to be very pro responsible gun ownership, but lately I’m thinking that level of responsibility is far too rare in people.
I have an airsoft gun and it’s only after I shot my wife in the ass that I considered the considerable weight of responsibility that such a weapon imposes on a man.
When I was a kid this guy released a movie like every week. And every time we’d go to a Jacky Chan movie, I’d walk out of that theater thinking I was the king of fuck mountain, that somebody aught to just TRY and fuck with me.
I was not the only one. I don’t know who it was, but I saw a comedian on comedy Central echo that exact same feeling, which seemed to resonate with the audience, so I know it’s not unique. You feel powerful just being in the presence of such a thing.
There’s a whole book series about the presence of powerful things being a corrupting presence. They’re pretty good. Turned in to movies and everything.
Don’t make the classic mistake of thinking everyone is limited to your abilities, there are other people in this world with their own thoughts and feelings that may not line up with yours and projecting your thoughts onto them is simply not a good basis for anything.
Well with the second amendment being interpreted as it is by the supreme court, that doesn’t seem like it could currently stand unfortunately. We do however require it for concealed carry permits in most states though, so at least that is something. We could also normalize gun shops give a basic multiple choice test before sales even without mandating it legally, as shops have the right to refuse sale to anyone if they seem sketchy (and often do refuse sales, but not often enough.)
Frankly I go a step further, we should make actors who don’t own guns but use real guns as props in movies should also be subject to learn at least Cooper’s 4 rules, like they do at most indoor shooting ranges on your first visit.
I am the same person as you except I actually carried around my gun. Being an stupid 21 year old with a gun sounds so stupid back then. I’m glad nobody died because of me.
I want some sort of driving test for guns. If you fail it, no guns for you. Have to retake it every 5-10 years and it’s pretty easy to pass if you aren’t a moron.
I’ve seen literally the dumbest shit on ranges. People flagging one another. Accidental discharges a few feet from one’s foot, flagrantly breaking the range rules while the range instructor literally just finished explaining the rules to everyone there.
Christ, one time (in a rural state) someone didn’t want to give up their CC to run a combat-style range. It was for safety, in case they ate shit on the course. They said they needed their CC in case there was a “terrorist attack”. I looked around the bumfuck, empty desert we were in and wondered where the terrorists would even come from, lmao.
This seems to work for the Swiss. Heck they have a shooting range that fires over a freeway, and any incident involving firearms makes national if not global news.
I want some sort of driving test for guns. If you fail it, no guns for you. Have to retake it every 5-10 years and it’s pretty easy to pass if you aren’t a moron.
So basically a CCW permit for carrying. Problem though with “uneducated or undereducated people shouldn’t have guns,” while I agree in principle, is that it’ll play out affecting poor and marginalized communities which are mostly POC more than say some white people who simply had more privileges growing up.
Again, in principle I agree, I just don’t trust our legal system not to turn it into racism like they do with everything else.
I agree with you on everything except that that’s what a CCW permit is. I’m sure in some states it’s that. In other states it’s closer to the test you take to get your temporary drivers permit as a kid.
It does depend on the state, and in some there’s even no permit, but in most that have them they do instruct about basic safety and use of force laws. That is however relegated to the state to form their own policy, and changes all the time. If you feel your state should do more it’s easier to work on that then federal, so it’s probably more effective this way tbh.
Honestly there isn’t much to gun safety, either, it isn’t actually all that hard and doesn’t really take too long to learn. The hard part is making sure people adhere to it at all times, which tbh is functionally impossible beyond “if you see someone being unsafe, say something” which is common to do amongst gun owners, but doesn’t prevent everything. Accidents can happen at any experience level, it’s also a common saying amongst experienced gun handlers/owners that “complacency kills,” and it does, it’s something you have to be ever thoughtful of while handling one (not always while carrying, I mean, but while it is out of the holster for any reason. Be it defense, range unloading/cleaning, leaving it in the car because of a no gun sign, etc.)
Also, just as a sidenote, something you can test for yourself: Go to any pro gun forum, say r/firearms or whatever, or c/leftistgunowners here, any one, and make a post saying something along the lines of “Hey I’ve decided it’s time to pick up my first gun, any advice?” I guarantee you many posts will say “welcome to the club,” many more will say “buy you a glock” and almost all of them will say “but it isn’t enough just to get it and put it under your bed, learn how to be safe and learn how to use it at the range. Last thing you want is to kill someone innocent or die fumbling with it because you never learned how.” It isn’t a legal requirement, and of course you could just waltz into a gunshop and avoid most of that, though they will also offer advice most often if they know it’s your first, but at least the culture at large generally is pretty safety conscious already without it being mandated, so at least that’s something.
Hard agree on the gun safety test. Buying a gun, especially in the US, is way too easy and the number of people walking around strapped with absolutely no knowledge of gun safety, let alone armed self defense training, is terrifying.
My wife’s family leans very hard into the guns, god and Trump right wing. My father in law set up a shooting range on his property, and it’s a tradition for the cousins to get together and show off their arsenal. I keep a pistol there because it’s a hellava range gun and the 22LR rounds are dirt cheap, but you can imagine the shit I catch in a family where 9mm is considered a “pussy round”.
The amount of stupid shit I’ve seen on this range would boggle your mind, and I feel a deep responsibility to make sure nobody dies while I’m there. I’ve seen people walk in front of the range with earmuffs on while someone was getting ready to shoot. I had to stop my father in law from breaking his thumb trying to shoot a Glock with his thumb resting right on the slide. I watched my uncle-in-law (a Republican state senator, mind you) hand a loaded AR-15 to his ten year old son, then just walk away.
You know I think that’s actually the intelligence and responsibility I expect from republican state senators. I bet he screams about how responsible gun owners shouldn’t be prevented from ownership just because of irresponsible gun owners
Are you sarcastically implying there’s no way someone would fear for their life in that situation, and then in the next sentence that the shooter is an easily frightened person who might’ve feared for their life?
“I feared for my life!” Is a direct quote I’ve heard more than a couple times from big burly manly Texas men I’ve worked with. I’d bet $20 this guy used to talk the same trash. They’ll claim that if they ever have to kill somebody, they’ll say that to the cops / judge and get set free for having fired in self-defense. I keep my thoughts to myself.
Except with y’all!
It sounds to me that these guys want everybody to think they’re super tough, but their pre-planned defense is to claim cowardice as a virtue, and they’ll tell you so ahead of time. It baffles me that they fail to feel shame for it, but I believe them when they proudly declare what cowards they are.
And yeah, that dude was an angry coward who wanted to lash out at the first person who dared cross an imaginary line in his head. There’s no reason to be afraid when a couple cars come down your driveway. But they’ve let themselves get whipped into a bloodthirsty frenzy over imaginary terrors. Fear is a central facet of their personalities.
This is what a steady diet of Fox News does to a motherfucker. This is exactly why Americans are so obsessed with guns, it’s why they pour so much money into their military, and it’s why 9/11 fundamentally reshaped their culture. They’re terrified of everything and anything around them, all the God damn time. They have to be armed, they have to be the biggest military power on the planet, and God forbid anyone remind them that none of that does them any good. America is a culture entirely driven by fear.
Fear doesn’t excuse what he did. You don’t get to murder defenceless people just because you’re afraid. He chose to own a lethal weapon and he chose to make using that weapon his first reaction to something that frightened him, instead taking even a few seconds to assess the situation. That’s 100% on him, and deserves every single year of that sentence and more.
Some politicians would find themselves unelectable if they didn’t have a platform of fear and othering to depend on for their continued access to power.
Judge Adam Michelini slammed Monahan in court, saying
NO HE DIDN’T. He SLAMMED Monahan by giving a calm milquetoast “what you did is awful and you should feel ashamed” statement? I wanna see a judge suplex a motherfucker before I see the word SLAM used in this context again
I don’t know what it is but I love it when the word slam is casually thrown into headlines and articles. Some weird fetish I guess. I don’t like clickbait but the use of that word is hilarious to me, especially when describing casual arguments like this instance.
Taxes get spent on all sorts of stuff you don’t want or need - that’s the purpose of tax, so the country can spend money on things it needs but individuals don’t necessarily want. You might as well complain about tax being spent to build roads you’re never going to drive on, or social services you don’t partake in. It’s all the same pool of money.
25 year sentences would not even be considered if rehabilitation was the intention. It is a sign of a sick system when we applaud 25 year sentences. The guy is not going to get better help for his mental illness after year 24 than he will get in the first year.
Is the government able to take possession of his house/land and personal property, sell it and use that to help fund his incarceration? Is that a thing?
Before I get downvoted to oblivion, I’m not saying they SHOULD. I’m just asking if that’s something they do. Maybe I should have worded it better.
I don’t know the rules in USA but I’d assume only in case of debt they are not able to pay after some time (years, likely). This could be fines or legal fees
Is the government able to take possession of his house/land and personal property, sell it and use that to help fund his incarceration? Is that a thing?
Yeah, a gateway to even more corruption. We already have Civil Asset Forfeiture, and it’s abused exactly how you think it would be. In all but a few cases, the money goes to law enforcement (local or otherwise). It’s basically legalized theft, though some states have higher thresholds than others.
Emphases mine:
In the United States, civil forfeiture (also called civil asset forfeiture or civil judicial forfeiture)[1] is a process in which law enforcement officers take assets from people who are suspected of involvement with crime or illegal activity without necessarily charging the owners with wrongdoing.
Add comment