586
submitted 1 year ago by jeffw@lemmy.world to c/politics@lemmy.world
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] alienanimals@lemmy.world 93 points 1 year ago

Countries like Switzerland don't have mass shootings like the USA, yet they have tons of guns. The lack of mental health support and the orphan crushing machine are a HUGE part of the mass murders here in America.

[-] CosmicSploogeDrizzle@lemmy.world 65 points 1 year ago

The rates of gun ownership between Switzerland and the USA are vastly different. USA ownership is almost double that of Switzerland.

https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-21379912

I'm not denying your take that it's a multifaceted issue, but equating the gun ownership between Switzerland and the USA doesn't paint an accurate picture.

[-] alienanimals@lemmy.world 49 points 1 year ago

Despite the USA having double the gun ownership that Switzerland does, the USA has more than 20 times the number of mass shootings. There's definitely more to this issue:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mass_shootings_in_Switzerland

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mass_shootings_in_the_United_States

[-] PoliticalAgitator@lemm.ee 51 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

If we're throwing out Wikipedia links, here are the actual laws in Switzerland, many of which the pro-gun community in America staunchly oppose adopting, including the mandatory military service that would actually qualify gun owners to be part of a "well regulated militia".

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firearms_regulation_in_Switzerland

[-] alienanimals@lemmy.world 10 points 1 year ago

Thanks! America could certainly learn from Switzerland on this issue.

[-] PoliticalAgitator@lemm.ee 22 points 1 year ago

Unfortunately, they're not interested in learning, especially from other countries.

It's just a way of deflecting blame away from failing gun laws so they can demand that other people spend 50 years building a impossible mental health utopia first.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] LetterboxPancake@sh.itjust.works 48 points 1 year ago

The Swiss also don't celebrate weapons as much as the US Americans.

I struggle to find the correct word. Celebrate isn't it, but I'm too tired to think about a better one and I don't want to start a comment war here. You'll probably understand what I meant.

[-] dual_sport_dork@lemmy.world 35 points 1 year ago

The Swiss also have compulsory military service (at least for men) where they theoretically teach you how to use and presumably not be a dummy with your gun.

[-] hansl@lemmy.world 11 points 1 year ago

Also do Switzerland have carry laws? If everyone left their firearms at home it would be much less of an issue too.

[-] BaroqueInMind@kbin.social 13 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Swiss can open carry in hunting areas with a license and allowed to store their own firearms and some duty fireams in their homes. They care more about to control the sales and storage of ammunition moreso than the actual rifles and handguns themselves.

[-] hansl@lemmy.world 16 points 1 year ago

In many states in the USA you can carry your weapon (both open and concealed) to the grocery store. It makes everyone uncomfortable and is super weird. Also most people don’t carry their guns properly and it would take someone about two seconds to steal it.

[-] PersnickityPenguin@lemm.ee 5 points 1 year ago

Yes:

"If you wish to carry a weapon in a public place, you must obtain a permit do so from the cantonal authorities. The permit is valid throughout Switzerland and you must have it on you at all times."

"Your application to carry a weapon will only be granted if you can prove that you must carry a weapon, for example if you are a private security officer, in order to protect yourself, other people or objects from tangible danger. You must also pass an exam on how to use weapons and the legal requirements for doing so."

Cantons are about the size of a county in the United States, so imagine getting a concealed permit for a particular county. They don't carry over, so you're not going to be able to travel very far with it.

Not that Swiss people really travel that far either...

[-] hansl@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

In Florida it’s a form that doesn’t do a background check and doesn’t even check that your main residence is in Florida. Then you can use that license in other states.

John Oliver did an episode on how absurd it is.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] sadbehr@lemmy.nz 9 points 1 year ago

Could this compulsory military service also alert authorities to people that aren't suitable to own private firearms?

[-] admiralteal@kbin.social 26 points 1 year ago

You also need a permit to buy a gun. Shall-issue for most of the guns I'd categorize as more reasonable, but still need to put in for the permit. Automatics have quite stringent requirements on their may-issue permits. High-cap magazines are not available. Universal registration & background check and "red flag"-style blocks on any purchases.

Ammo is also included in these rules, essentially.

Second-hand sales require a paper trail conforming to many of these rules with a decade-long statute of limitations to prove legitimate transfer that is also reported to the state authority.

Storage methods are regulated. Failure to report a lost/stolen weapon to police is bad news for you.

You need a permit to carry which is mostly only given to people who have occupational need to carry -- like the old NYC law where you have to state a plausible need. Otherwise, when and where you can carry is limited to basically sport or similar events.

And there's more. Not to mention their culture of training and safety around it because of their military and militia requirements.

I'm all for imposing Swiss-style gun rules on the US. It would restrict guns a lot. The people who appeal to how great they are with guns and how it is "proof" that gun restrictions aren't a good solution just haven't even done basic research about what the gun situation actually is in Switzerland.

[-] captainlezbian@lemmy.world 17 points 1 year ago

Fetishize is probably the word you want. Guns aren’t a tool here, they’re a symbol

[-] Jimmyeatsausage@lemmy.world 13 points 1 year ago

I think the word is "fetishize"

[-] chiliedogg@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago

I think a large part of it is the politicization of firearms that has made gun ownership a lifestyle choice for unstable people.

You've got a bunch of crazy conspiracy theorists being told that the liberals are out to kill their god and take their weapons, so they stock up on weapons that they use when they finally crack.

We've manufactured a system where the mentally unstable are actively encouraged to arm themselves.

[-] Zorque@kbin.social 5 points 1 year ago

Deify. They deify guns.

[-] corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca 4 points 1 year ago

I use the word 'clutch' often, as a baby with a blanket or an old nerd with vi. They're unwilling to find a better solution than a gun, and the gun lobby tells us it's all okay as long as we have our Glock.

...come to think of it, so much rap music seemed to do the same, for awhile.

Sorry it took me so long to answer, I accidentally started vi and had to reboot my computer to quit it.

Not a bad word at all, this might be the correct one.

[-] alienanimals@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

I agree with you. There is no need for a comment war.

[-] Witchfire@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

Flaunt? It really is w divide. We have normal people, some of whom are responsible gun owners but most of whom don't have guns, and then we have that crowd

[-] Tedesche@lemmy.world 18 points 1 year ago

This. I’m a liberal and I definitely think we need tighter restrictions on guns in the U.S., but people today seem to have forgotten that we’ve had essentially the same gun laws for forever and mass shootings have only been a weekly occurrence for about 10-15 years. It’s not the guns or the gun laws or even mental health issues (depending on how you want to define them); it’s some fucked up aspects of our culture.

[-] ThePyroPython@lemmy.world 18 points 1 year ago

It's multiple issues:

  • Lack of access to mental health services.
  • 24/7 commercial news geared more towards fear than information with no fair and balanced doctrine for reporting.
  • A widening wealth gap depriving those at the bottom of the income ladder the dignity of a stable life.
  • Private ownership of said media suppressing unfavourable stories.
  • Civil forfeiture and warrior cop training creating a mafia attitude in US Police departments.
  • A lack of realisation that the historical context for gun ownership in the US was to keep the natives off the land cliamed by a settler because the British didn't want to repeat Spain's mistakes.
  • More willing to accept licensing and denial of access to a car as punishment for breaking driving laws despite that the car is more fundamental to existing in modern US than the Gun.
  • Treating the constitution like a holy manuscript rather than it's original purpose of being updated/replaced every 5 to 10 years.
  • A broken electoral system in dire need of reform.
  • Underfunding education.
  • Lobbying so rampant they might as well host the bidding for Washington representatives on eBay.

The list is very very long. The USA's cultural fabric that is the people's common heritage is being stretched and torn by those who believe they can make a profit from the scraps.

The USA is a young anglophile country, you've only had one civil war, I reckon you've got at least another one coming.

[-] ArcaneSlime@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 1 year ago

More willing to accept licensing and denial of access to a car as punishment for breaking driving laws despite that the car is more fundamental to existing in modern US than the Gun.

Licensing to carry exists in most states, though some have removed that. We also do typically remove access to guns (or at least the CCW depending on state and infraction) as punishment for breaking gun laws.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] calypsopub@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago

Agreed. The root cause is multifaceted. People seem to ignore the fact that the shooters are almost 100 percent male, with the vast majority being disaffected loners, white, and young. What has caused these men and boys to fantasize about killing masses of people? It's far more complicated than folks like to admit. We want a simple scapegoat, so we blame guns.

[-] jamms@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago

Using your timeline of mass shooting increases, an immediate reason to consider should be the assault weapon law expiring in 2004. Data would back that up. We haven't had the same laws forever. https://ohiocapitaljournal.com/2022/06/15/did-the-assault-weapons-ban-of-1994-bring-down-mass-shootings-heres-what-the-data-tells-us/

[-] Tedesche@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago

Your own source shows that mass shootings weren't as high as they are now prior to the assault weapons ban, thus demonstrating it wasn't repeal of the law that caused the recent uptick. If it was, we'd see a similar amount of mass shootings prior to its enactment as well.

[-] PersnickityPenguin@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago

You still have mass shootings prior to the 2004 law. For instance, there was the University of Austin mass shooting back in the 1960s. The Columbine shooting in '99. We've been at this for a long time.

In fact, the frequency of mass shootings as defined by four or more people being shot in an incident has basically been flat since 1980 was only a slight increase from about 15 to 20 shootings per year.

It's a big difference is media reporting.

A Comprehensive Assessment of Deadly Mass Shootings, 1980-2018 (pg 12) https://www.ojp.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/305090.pdf

[-] Tedesche@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago

Yes, but that doesn’t change my point. If it really was the law that made the difference, we would’ve seen more of an impact. Given that there are plenty of other factors contributing to mass shootings as well, I see little reason to credit the law with the prevention some people like to give it.

I’m a liberal and I definitely think we need tighter restrictions on guns in the U.S., but people today seem to have forgotten that we’ve had essentially the same gun laws for forever

Sure but the same party that works so hard against increased legislation for gun control gutted our mental health infrastructure and votes against funding and rebuilding it at every opportunity. They aren't interested in solving either end of the problem.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mental_Health_Systems_Act_of_1980

https://sociology.org/content/vol003.004/thomas.html

This last one is a ddg search - you can just pick which article you want to read about Republicans voting against mental health funding.

https://duckduckgo.com/?q=republicans+vote+against+mental+health+funding

[-] Tedesche@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

You're missing my point. Mental health issues aren't the primary problem when it comes to firearm violence and deaths. Republican resistance to laws that attempt to address mental health issues deserves pointing out, but not so much in this context, because that's not the main issue at hand. Liberals can be commended for attempting to do something about the problem more than Republicans are, but what I've seen of their views on the topic indicates to me that they too are missing the point. The problem isn't guns or severe psychiatric problems; there's a cultural element that no one (including Democrats, for some reason) aren't willing to address. Until we identify and focus on the actual problem, no progress will be made, because we'll just continue to fight about stuff that isn't that relevant.

load more comments (6 replies)
[-] guacupado@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago

Exactly. Access to guns isn't the issue, lack of education and failed parenting is. I'm pretty fucking liberal but even in the single generation I've been alive I'm pretty sure parenting has gotten significantly worse. I go out of my way to make sure my kids let me know if stuff is bothering them and explain how to respond to things that frustrate them. I'm sure this is going to go into parents working 24/7 but that also isn't anything new.

load more comments (15 replies)
[-] GiddyGap@lemm.ee 10 points 1 year ago

Huge difference between Switzerland and the US. Switzerland has a lot of weapons because, more or less, everyone is in the army and they keep their service weapons at home. And there are very strict rules regulating those weapons as opposed to the non-existent regulation in the US.

[-] luckysushi22@lemmy.world 10 points 1 year ago

Switzerland has pretty restrictive laws about the ammunition that people use in their guns as well. Most of the gun owners have little to no ammo available to them at any given time. And most of those Swiss gun owners have also been conscripted into the armed forces and been through rigorous training and the use of firearms.

[-] Patches@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 year ago

Can confirm. You can see more about Switzerland's gun control here:

https://youtu.be/F2Uqq9Bz-WU?si=_xPUjEFT7L0mXRmy

[-] LilB0kChoy@lemm.ee 7 points 1 year ago

How do any gun control laws in Switzerland compare to the US?

[-] PersnickityPenguin@lemm.ee 21 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

From Switzerland: "Depending on the type of weapon, you will require a sales contract, a weapon acquisition permit or an exemption permit."

Semi-automatic weapons require a permit, and fully automatic weapons and firearms with large capacity magazines are banned and only allowed under special, petition able circumstamces.

--

For military service issued weapons: The Swiss don't allow their citizens access to ammunition (they used to issue a single magazine IIRC), all weapons are only distributed based on compulsory military service, and are to remain locked away except for when transported to the firing range for your annual qualification or practice.

Also, I do t think they allow swiss to keep their rifles anymore; I believe they are currently stored in the armory.

[-] Landsharkgun@midwest.social 5 points 1 year ago

Sounds like a well regulated miltia :thinking:

load more comments (1 replies)
this post was submitted on 11 Nov 2023
586 points (86.9% liked)

politics

19097 readers
3050 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! 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.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS