this post was submitted on 07 Dec 2023
365 points (97.7% liked)

World News

48617 readers
2376 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

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.

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.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

You know what would be a lot higher? Not letting mentally ill people or domestic abusers, or people who have shown to use them in an unsafe manner around children have access to them. But apparently that is way too far in America.

[–] ArcaneSlime@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

People who have been convicted of domestic violence are already federally barred from firearms ownership, same for people who have been involuntarily committed, and child endangerment is already also a crime that falls outside the scope of simply firearms.

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

People who have been convicted of domestic violence are already federally barred from firearms ownership

Not for long.

same for people who have been involuntarily committed

That's not what I said, I said a history of mental illness.

and child endangerment is already also a crime that falls outside the scope of simply firearms.

But it doesn't include handgun ownership, which you know full well. And that's what we're talking about here.

But since you are blatantly misrepresenting what I said and being incredibly dishonest, I don't think this conversation needs to continue.

[–] ArcaneSlime@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

That's not what I said, I said a history of mental illness.

Ah, so you want to nebulously define mental illness to include depressed people, people with ADHD, BPD, Bi-polar, and trans people as "undesireables." Well this ableist position thankfully isn't the law and it requires proof that a person is actually dangerous before stripping their rights. Furthermore all it does is make people less likely to seek the help they actually need for fear of being barred from rights for having a mental illness that wouldn't have made them be violent anyway (stop stigmatizing the mentally ill btw, do better.)

But it doesn't include handgun ownership, which you know full well.

Ah but it does. If someone is actually endangering their children with a handgun it absolutely applies, but no, "owning a handgun" isn't in and of itself child endangerment and your suggestion that it should be is quite laughable.

You seem to have a habit of cutting and running every time I prove that you have no idea what you're talking about. By all means take your ball and go home lol.