This is why we chose to stay home on holidays. I feel bad that my kids are missing out, but I would rather have them miss some fireworks than risk becoming a statistic.
this post was submitted on 05 Jul 2023
0 points (NaN% liked)
World News
32146 readers
895 users here now
News from around the world!
Rules:
-
Please only post links to actual news sources, no tabloid sites, etc
-
No NSFW content
-
No hate speech, bigotry, propaganda, etc
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
You are paranoid and ruining your children's childhood for no reason at all. Learn statistics, and incorporate that into your daily life. Hint if you drive a car you are endangering your children way more.
Interesting, you’re telling me to learn statistics, and then you skipped over the leading cause of death for children in the United States.
Try incorporating empathy in your life, and understand it’s not about you. If you don’t have the same concern as others, you don’t have to resort to insults; you can accept that someone else feels differently without trying to hurt them.
So first and foremost, how you raise your children is your business. Also, it really sucks you live in a place where you have to factor can violence into the education of your kids. However, as someone who believes over protecting children can be more harmful than beneficial to them, there is a counter argument to be made.
In a way, the tone of the reply of the other poster might have been more wrong than the content. What I mean by this, is that statistics is a very tricky science to apply to our own reality sometimes. For instance, one could substract the cases of gun violence caused by guns of the own household if you don’t own any guns. Or correct for the area you live in, if this is a place with particularly low or high incidence of gun violence. Or discount the school shooting statistics, if you are only using the statistics as a reason not to let them go to social gatherings.
Again, in no way do I want to tell you what to do, just stating that the same statistics can be used to both support or counter an argument.
‘No Way To Prevent This,’ Says Only Nation Where This Regularly Happens
Average of 2.2 mass shooting every day this year
Just absolutely mind boggling how frequently this happens and literally nothing is being done about it. What a sick country.
They ARE doing something about it.
Financing the whole thing!
"They ARE doing something about it. Financing the whole thing!".
No they are not. You seem also out of control, buddy.
It's all a mix of the second ammendment, their interpretation & execution of that law, a dominant military and guns lobby system (Billionaire$); people loving their guns, no access to good (mental) health care, which allthogether is holding their country hostage, imho.
So yeah, its all out of control. And nothing has changed, except that it's getting worse.
add.(mental) healthcare
Part 1:
No they are not
Part 2:
It’s all a mix of the second ammendment, their interpretation & execution of that law, a dominant military and guns lobby system (Billionaire$); people loving their guns, no access to good (mental) health care, which allthogether is holding their country hostage, imho.
LOL
He is not that wrong, after all switzerland too have guns and they control it with ease. They even celebrate a gun festival. where children practice shooting.
New York has more people than Switzerland.
That's why we use per capita for statistics like this. It doesn't matter who has more people if you adjust for population. Now, you could argue density is the problem, but in less dense places in the US the rate is even higher, so...
Excellent mental gymnastics, color me impressed. You've almost made me think Switzerland is the USA.
Excellent nothing argument. Would you care to explain why the US couldn't have a gun culture like Switzerland if it's not due to population density or population size?
The only 'mass shooting' was the Philly one. Intellectually stunted and politically blinded morons are trying to change the definition by lumping in gang bangers doing drive bys and shooting up house parties. If you Individually dig through the gunviolencearchive.org sources, the overwhelming majority of them have an African American teenager with a handgun set out to settle a personal vendetta; yet somehow that scenario is - by gunviolence.orgs own statistical criteria - categorized the same exact way as a deranged psychopath with an AR-15 randomly shooting up a mall (which even once is way too fucking common, but not as statistically prominent as the site is trying to mislead the public to believe).
It's not a gun problem, it's a cultural one.
Why can't it be both? Especially when guns are so interwoven into the culture.
So it's not a mass shooting if the person is black and the crime is personal? What led you to come with that criteria? I tend to think "A mass shooting is a violent crime in which an attacker kills or injures multiple individuals simultaneously using a firearm." is a pretty fair definition. You know "mass" as in several individuals involved and "shooting" as in a firearm was involved. Keep it up with the mental gymnastics though.
People love to point the fingers at the tool used to do evil things. Instead of addressing why the evil thing is happening.
Banning and restricting guns is a band aid solution that harms the general populace more than it benefits.
Bad actors that want to inflict harm are not concerned with using something legal to get the job done. There will always be inventive whackos out there that will find ways to hurt people. Guns or no guns.
The Swiss have almost the same firearm to people ratio as America ( at least compared to the rest of the world ) and under have far fewer of the same issues. I think this is largely because of cultural differences and availability for healthcare.
Weird how the US is literally the only first world country with this problem. No way it has anything to do with the ease of access to guns!
I wonder if there are any other differences in America from other first-world countries? Maybe it's the availability of swimming pools? Or too many McDonalds? Or maybe there are numerous social issues that are unaddressed here in the states and have been responsible for a much higher incidence of violence in general, of which guns are a small part.
There’s violent and unhinged people in every country. The difference is the guns… it couldn’t be anymore fucking obvious lol
Meanwhile, over 500 people have been killed by police in 2023 so far, and yet we never hear the president comment on that. Maybe we should be disarming the police?
Maybe disarm everyone?
Why? Lots of people have guns, and almost all of them are never a problem to anyone. Perhaps we should look into why violence happens and address those root causes and of course disarm the police because their only purpose is violence.
Everyone having guns is the sole reason there’s so many police shootings. Nothing is going to change until the general population is unarmed.
What an insane take. Plenty of police shootings are on unarmed individuals. Moreover, having an unarmed populace wouldn't prevent police shootings when the core cause of police brutality isn't addressed. They demand control and obedience; you being unarmed doesn't make them any less likely to shoot you if you're not being obedient.
That’s not a “take” that’s reality lol
US cops have to always assume that someone can be armed given the insane amount of guns and ease of access. That is directly correlated with the wide spread use of lethal force.
Cops in countries with sane gun laws, for example the UK, can safely assume the average citizen does not have a gun on them.
It's used as an excuse. If people weren't armed, they'd find another excuse. That's what I mean by not addressing the underlying problem of police brutality and abuse of power. Also, they'll always say they thought someone had a gun even when they know almost for certain the person didn't, because they know you'll buy it.
What other excuse? Guns are literally the main issue…
You can have the best police training programs in the world, but if the population is heavily armed and unregulated you’re still going to have ton of police shootings.
Of course they always say “thought we saw a gun”. Guns are so numerous they have to assume the worst else the chances of getting shot goes way up.
Maybe the police shouldn't use the presence of gun as an excuse to start shooting people? Especially in a country with more guns then people?
I’m sure police would love the idea of just getting shot first lol