this post was submitted on 16 Jan 2025
125 points (98.4% liked)

Seattle

1773 readers
22 users here now

A community for news and discussion of Seattle, Washington and the surrounding area

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] HelixDab2@lemm.ee 25 points 2 months ago (1 children)

I'd like to take, "Laws that will be overturned by Bruen v. NYSPRA precedent" for $100, Alex.

[–] Maggoty@lemmy.world 3 points 2 months ago (3 children)

SCOTUS would need to create new precedent, this isn't a carry ban it's a location ban.

[–] stormeuh@lemmy.world 4 points 2 months ago

But current SCOTUS will gladly use this as an excuse to establish that precedent.

[–] HelixDab2@lemm.ee 3 points 2 months ago (5 children)

It's a pretty short series of hops from Heller v. D.C. to McDonald v. Chicago to Bruen v. NYSPRA to this. If you're banning carrying at almost every place, public and private, then it's a de facto ban.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] Itdidnttrickledown@lemmy.world 2 points 2 months ago

Its true scotus doesn't want guns in their presence.

[–] dual_sport_dork@lemmy.world 17 points 2 months ago (6 children)

If approved, the state would prohibit possession at public buildings, parks, fairgrounds and playgrounds where “children are likely to be present.”

State law already prohibits possession in restricted access areas of airports, jails, law enforcement and public health facilities, courtrooms and other related areas, bars and places off-limits to minors.

Something's not adding up, here.

[–] Bacano@lemmy.world 8 points 2 months ago

Authoritarianism goes brrr

[–] kinther@lemmy.world 7 points 2 months ago (1 children)

What? Bars, taverns, wineries, etc are all 21+.

[–] JasonDJ@lemmy.zip 12 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

Everybody is so caught up on the idea that banning guns at schools is ineffective. You see, clearly, you have to allow the guns, but ban the kids.

[–] teawrecks@sopuli.xyz 3 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Isn't that Trump's plan with the Dept of Education?

[–] JasonDJ@lemmy.zip 3 points 2 months ago

No, his plan there is to just ban the schools. Galaxy-brain, right there.

[–] phoenixz@lemmy.ca 3 points 2 months ago

Republicans: fetuses are babies! The word "gay" corrupts a child! Won't anyone think of the Children??

Also republicans: were not paying for kids lunches, fuck those kids. Kids have school shooting problems? Then get a bullet proof blanket you whiny bitch! Guns are not allowed where we adults have fun, or work, but around kids? All fine, shut your whining!

Such a nice group of caring people

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Maggoty@lemmy.world 8 points 2 months ago

public buildings, parks, fairgrounds and playgrounds where “children are likely to be present."

That all seems like a pretty good idea to me.

[–] jaggedrobotpubes@lemmy.world 7 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Such an obviously good idea.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] henfredemars@infosec.pub 4 points 2 months ago (10 children)

I don’t live in Seattle. I’d like to ask a local, if one is reading, how they feel about this.

[–] kinther@lemmy.world 18 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (19 children)

We already do not allow concealed carry in many places. I think it makes sense to not allow them in parks, public buildings, etc.

This coming from a firearm owner who has had a concealed carry permit in the past.

[–] Rivalarrival 4 points 2 months ago (3 children)

I think it makes sense to not allow them in parks, public buildings, etc.

If they are somehow immune from violent perpetrators, I would agree. For example, if the "public building" has armed security.

Otherwise, we're just creating unarmed victim zones.

[–] paraphrand@lemmy.world 5 points 2 months ago

From my perspective, it’s zones that are free of hammers looking for nails.

[–] PunnyName@lemmy.world 3 points 2 months ago (3 children)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] kinther@lemmy.world 3 points 2 months ago (3 children)

You are calling out the armed civilian argument. Please point me to an armed civilian who has stopped a school shooting.

[–] Rivalarrival 4 points 2 months ago (2 children)

Are you suggesting that "school shootings" are the only type of violence that should be stopped?

That rapes shouldn't be stopped?

That armed robberies shouldn't be stopped?

That burglaries shouldn't be stopped?

That muggings shouldn't be stopped?

You are specifically asking for a contradiction: An event that simultaneously occurred, and was prevented by an armed individual. I cannot answer your paradoxical scenario.

[–] kinther@lemmy.world 2 points 2 months ago (1 children)

I never suggested anything of the sort. I asked a simple question of you which you don't seem to be able to answer.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] MothmanDelorian@lemmy.world 2 points 2 months ago (1 children)

A better question is how many murders happened because of the availability of firearms vs how many crimes did the use of a firearm prevent a violent crime.

I suspect many many many more murders happen because of how easy it us to get guns vs how many crimes are stopped because of them.

[–] Rivalarrival 2 points 2 months ago (8 children)

That is, indeed, a better question.

But as soon as you go there, you have to weigh 1,220,000 reported violent crimes (most criminal violence goes unreported) against ~19,000 murders (virtually all murders are reported).

You're 64 times more likely to report a violent crime than to be murdered, and several times more likely than that to experience (but not report) a violent crime.

Guns are used far more often to stop those violent crimes than to commit murder.

load more comments (8 replies)
[–] shalafi@lemmy.world 2 points 2 months ago

One stat you'll never get is violence prevented by the mere presence of a gun.

Ran into a hunter the other day. Oh boy was he fucking pissed to find me on his hunting lease, again. (I got lost. Sue me.) Dude was fucking shaking, about to choke trying to be polite. I suspect he would have beat my skinny ass if not for the pistol under my arm.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (18 replies)
[–] Sprocketfree@sh.itjust.works 2 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Less guns around me the better. The older I get the more I think we'd be better off banning all guns in this country.

[–] shalafi@lemmy.world 3 points 2 months ago (9 children)

I suspect you're vastly underestimating the number of concealed guns around you.

load more comments (9 replies)
load more comments (8 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›