257
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 26 Sep 2024
257 points (95.4% liked)
News
23275 readers
3465 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Ending the war on drugs doesn't. I disagree
Sorry. It's the exact opposite. Here in Australia we have a serious meth problem and we are full of assholes who are incredibly toxic and drugged up. Ending the war on drugs just makes addictive drugs even more accessible, so people are more likely to try them and encourage others to do so
Highly addictive drugs should not be legalized, and it certainly isn't the reason for school shootings and such
What protects us is gun laws, and you guys need stronger ones
The war on drugs is a euphemism. Ending It doesn't mean stop drug legislation, it means stop putting parents in jail for 10 years and putting their kids in care because they smoked weed and the kid accidentally told a cop when the cop visited their school and told them if they didn't rat out their parents something worse would happen.
Correct. The majority of our prison is non violent drug offenders, who lose their children, which end up in bad situations...which cause some of them to turn to gangs for that family role. It's a cycle that feeds violence, and the most fucked up part, is it drastically effects minorities more than anyone else.
They already changed that didn't they?
I was in denver 2 weeks ago, and didn't seem like anyone was going to jail for cannabis...
It didn't stop gun violence.
Gun violence has very little to do with drug legalisation. It seems like people are just tacking it on as something they want, but it seems fairly dishonest, especially since you guys are getting a lot of mass shootings at schools and such which clearly aren't related. It might only reduce the number of smaller shootings
Better gun control is the primary factor that stops gun violence in most countries. At this time, everyone in US treats them like toys and fashion accessories. So when someone is getting bullied or having a shitty week, its very easy for them to snap and react. Here in Australia, they can't easily react by grabbing a gun.
We pulled the majority of them out of circulation for a reason.. And it worked
You in Australia did not have anywhere near the firearms we have in civ hands. Even then, the forced confiscation you did only 60% turned in their firearms. You know what %60 leaves here in the states? Over 100 million firearms in civ hands.
The drug wars target mainly minorities which cause parents to go to jail, and kids to turn to gangs. It absolutely has an effect on our gun violence. Which the mass majority of our violence comes from is gang related, not random shootings like you hear in the news.
This isn't a hard concept to understand imho.
I agree, the amnesty didn't turn in ALL firearms. That's completely missing the point
HOWEVER.. The entire point of the amnesty, is to make it illegal for ownership of certain firearms, make them illegal to resell, etc., but you give people incentive to give up and make money from the ones they shouldn't own
Over time, you end up with far less guns in circulation.
That's what happened here in Australia.
You might still have a huge amount of firearms, but the aim isn't to solve the problem overnight. But, it saves a huge amount of the problem immediately, and over time, it solves the issue..
It works.. It worked for us. You're playing the short game.
You're trying to argue that unless the solution is 100%, it isn't worth pursuing.
No, but we have some of the most effective protection against shootings in the world. So it would be silly to ignore a working solution. We don't have a lot of the things on that list
The issue is the antigun groups are targeting rifles. You know how many people are killed by rifles a year? 1.5-2.5k, this is all rifles and shotguns combined. You know how many people are killed by AR-15s a year? 50-100...yea the weapon of choice for murder here in the states is handguns. It's not about keeping people safe, it's about virtue signaling to their base.
Pandora's box is open here. There is no closing it
Not really, you all now have more guns in civ hands than before the ban. Ratio wise it's less but that's because you have more people.
Unless you plan on banning knives, which kill around 3.5k a year (yes that's correct more than all rifles and shotguns combined) then it's not about saving lives. It's about saving certain lives.
It worked for you, because you have safety nets. You don't have a shit ton of gangs and drugs flowing through the streets. You don't have cartels 4 foot from your boarder. You also don't have the population size we do.
No, I'm arguing that it's a solution that will not work for even 5%. As I have explained above, rifles which are the targets, make up basically nothing when it comes to firearm deaths. Yet they're the constant focus. If we're to fix our violence issue here in the USA, we need to help get people to stop being violent first.
You have some major ones on that list. You for one don't lock up everyone who is a non violent drug offender to the point that you create broken homes which fuels gang membership. You don't have qualified immunity either, which here in the USA, 1 in 40 of our gun deaths is by the police. (Yes you read that correctly, the police here kill on average 1k Americans a year via firearms). You have single payer healthcare, you give a shit about your citizens and have safety nets. We lack so much that it drives our citizens into poverty and creates prime circumstances for violence.
K-12 and colleges/universities are only the setting of ~12.8% of mass shootings.
Your just making speculative hyperbole about a nation a hemisphere away. Isolating any one factor as reducing crime is often near impossible. A downward trend following legislative can just as easily be attributed to other factors like a general decline in criminality over time or due to bettering economic conditions (among countless other factors).
Wow. Only 12%
Primary schools and secondary schools should be 0 lol
No one argues other. But you rebuke the notion that the war on drugs has any significance on the broader topic. Basing opinions on falsities.
In other words:
schools represent a vast minority of mass killings. Not to mention your baseless assertion that violence in schools must have no relationship to the war on drugs. As if the gangs that move them don't groom children to sell them for them.