You must log in or # to comment.
If only gun safety legistlation wasn’t invariably gun ban legislation. No thanks Democrats, I’m trying to actually survive fascism, not do everything in my power to be completely defenseless against it.
But guns… are bad.
So your mind is changed now, right?
And then everyone clapped?
You realize that if the fascists come to your door a gun won’t save your life. Hell it’s the fascist who are going to come for your guns. People have said the Democrats are going to do it for decades and there are still more guns than people in the US. The fascists will have dozens of rifles, an armoured personnel carrier, and dozens more personnel, ready and willing to be deployed once they get into a fire fight. They will have professional training whereas you will have Call Of Duty.
Have you ever actually encountered a gun owner who was under the impression that they’d be able to fend off a military force with their single rifle?
Like seriously, think for a moment. Be honest with yourself. Have you ever actually derailed someone with that stupid fucking question?
Shrugs I’d rather choose to fight and die than piss myself in a corner crying about how hard it is.
Are there stats for kids killed by these monstrous pick ups? Dodge Ram, hummers etc
I don’t know about lifted pickups in general, but the NHTSA recorded that there were 39,345 traffic fatalities in the US in 2024. So OP’s chart is missing a few lines.
- Traffic Deaths: 39,345 (in 2024)
- Killed By Police: 1,365 (recorded in 2024)
- Medical Malpractice Deaths: 250,000 (estimated annual)
- Preventable Deaths due to Illness: 44,000 (lowerbound annual estimate)
- Malnutrition Deaths: 6,762 (in 2022)
So, yeah. Our politicians, capitalist overlords, and a fucked up for-profit medical system are killing us all either by inches or just outright, at the rate of a combined hundreds of thousands per year. But ermahgerd, gunz!!!
But they need their guns in case a fascist government takes over and becomes a police state threatening to take away their rights and liberties.
Waitaminute…
They who have guns want the police state.
It’s all the lefties who haven’t listened to Marx who don’t have guns.
10 a day? Holy shit!
It’s an extremely round number for a post with no attributed source.
in 2022 it was 2,526, so closer to 7 per day.
We really only see reporting on it when it’s a school and white children are involved. Things that make you go “Hmnn.”
https://publichealth.jhu.edu/2024/guns-remain-leading-cause-of-death-for-children-and-teens
https://publichealth.jhu.edu/2024/guns-remain-leading-cause-of-death-for-children-and-teens
I don’t know 2024 rates but in 2022 it was about 7 per day.
What makes us blind to these numbers is that black children are 18 times more likely to be a victim of gun violence. Inner-city gang violence and relics of segregation are still with us, and the media doesn’t report it as an issue because it’s just “expected” that there are black kids shooting each other in cities. That way we don’t have to do anything.
I mean, who else is gonna fill our for-profit prisons? Gotta have a hopeless segment of the population!
I suspect a conservative might believe that the “gay lifestyle” kills people through AIDS, and probably believe trans people are groomed and their suicides are a result of that, so they might view LGBTQ+ rights as leading to deaths, if I had to guess
Yeah. And they probably view guns as a way of protecting children, too.
I see a lot of posts that just completely don’t understand the conservative mindset at all, and imagine that explaining things to them like one would explain things to a leftist is going to work. There’s just too much inferential distance for memes like this. Sigh :/
you get it exactly, this kind of meme, if anything, works against our political goals, by re-affirming conservatives in their mindset and alienating them by failing to provide a rhetorical “bridge” that allows them to see things differently
like you say, expecting them to respond as though they already agree with you (and as if you can just shame them into agreement) is entirely the wrong approach
Your telling me the country with more guns has more gun deaths, wow impossible to predict.
This is statistically meaningless, you want to look at the violent crime rate overall, the murder rate overall, etc.
Like I can guarantee Minnesota has more freezing deaths than Texas. That doesn’t say anything about if freezing deaths are a major issue or not. We need a statistical analysis of total murder rate not raw numbers
You’re saying the US doesn’t have a higher homicide rate than other high-income countries?
No, I’m saying it does and that’s the stat that matters
And there’s probably a reason for that. Hmm, I wonder what it could be?
I’m not disagreeing lol, guns absolutely play a part
Welcome to the comments: Here you’ll find
- various reasons it’s important Americans have guns (yet to see that armed resistance)
- discussion about out all the other stuff killing American kids
- at the bottom relevant stats from other countries without widespread firearm ownership
In Japan there was zero child deaths by guns. They have a little less than half the population of the US but none of the gun deaths.
Because those issues are about protecting the status quo power structure, not about protecting kids.
Sadly, no they do not.
There is no consequence for supporting accountability-free gun purchases and ownership, even after Uvalde, where all of the politicians involved were re-elected.
IDF: 36000
I thought it was way more
probably…
Here’s what I’ve often wondered: why, when the Constitution clearly indicates that bearing of arms is in the context of a" well-regulated militia", is it not permissible, under the Constitution, to regulate firearms? Do the second amendment types have any kind of argument about this? It just seems to me that within the context of the amendment itself, it’s clearly implied that regulation will be necessary and will exist. Is there something that I’m missing?
If you cared at all you’d actually read up on the context and interpretation of the 2nd amendment.
Or, and stick with me, here, maybe I’m asking the question in hopes I can discuss it with someone that has already read up on it and find out that way? Maybe I can learn some viewpoints of others in this thread that might illuminate the answer more quickly and succinctly. What is the point of communicating with others if I can’t seek information through it?
Yes. The text of the 2nd amendment is contested and several states passed different punctuation, which changes the meaning.
The most favorable version for individual gun ownership reads:
A well regulated Militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed.
The placement of the comma there makes the well regulated militia part an introductory clause, which explains the purpose of the second part protecting individual gun ownership.
That combined with the historical context that anyone called into miltia service was expected to provide their own gun is the justification for individual gun ownership being a protected right.
The more common text passed by congress is more ambiguous because it introduces an explanatory clause as part of the introductory clause, but you can still read it that way, which the supreme court currently has.
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
But…but … but they need those guns just in case a weirdo tries to take over the government.
Or if a pants shitting reality TV ‘star’ goes full revenge mode when he becomes president.
Or if a child rapist, who is also a Russian asset, but who’s also the best friend to a proven and convicted human trafficking paedo blackmailer strolls in and overtakes the Whitehouse and takes his KKK mask off and hops in to being a full on fascist dictator!If any of the above ever happened you’ll be glad that the Gravy Seals™ had all those guns to stop it all.
Not that the above could ever happen. Imagine that, imagine if one of those things ever happened? Wow, Impossible!! Just impossible.
…hey, wait a minute!!!If you extrapolate from FBI data, 90%+ of gun deaths come from handguns. Banning handguns is a hopeless endeavor - there are two Supreme Court cases from 2008 and 2010 that effectively cement handgun ownership as a constitutional right.
You could try a couple pages out of the California playbook with the handgun roster and ammo background checks to make getting them and using them kind of a pain in the ass.
I honestly don’t know what you do otherwise to make dent otherwise.
3600…so far.
