• Flying Squid@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    16
    arrow-down
    15
    ·
    4 months ago

    Why does the type of gun violence matter? Why does it matter whether or not they know the victims?

    I don’t understand the relevance to the gun control discussion.

    • jeffw@lemmy.worldOPM
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      17
      ·
      4 months ago

      It matters for media coverage because gang wars are different than “innocent little granny shot by lone wolf”

      • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        9
        ·
        4 months ago

        But isn’t the source of the problem the same for both? Or do you mean that people consuming the news just don’t sympathize with murders when it’s a gang war?

        I’m not trying to be argumentative, just trying to understand this because it gets brought up a lot when mass shootings happen and I guess to me, murder is murder.

        • jeffw@lemmy.worldOPM
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          13
          ·
          4 months ago

          Right, it just doesn’t get media coverage because we don’t sympathize in those cases. And it doesn’t fit into people’s mental concept of “mass shooting” as a result. Someone elsewhere in these comments already tried to say this doesn’t count as a mass shooting

        • lightnsfw@reddthat.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          4 months ago

          The source of the problem is crime (often due to poverty/gang culture) and mental health issues. If the source of the problem was gun owners there would be far more deaths. Millions of people own guns without ever harming anyone. Fixing healthcare so it’s accessible to people who need it, expanding social services, and fixing income inequality is the real solution.

          • AbidanYre@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            4 months ago

            Unfortunately the people opposed to gun control are also typically opposed to all those things you mentioned.

            • ArcaneSlime@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              7
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              4 months ago

              Sure, but that doesn’t mean you should fight them for gun control instead of fighting them for the other things. You can instead advocate for those other things. Those other things are also easier tbh because they don’t require an amendment to the constitution to happen.

              • AbidanYre@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                4
                arrow-down
                3
                ·
                edit-2
                3 months ago

                Or we can fight for both since no one needs the kind of hardware that’s out there right now.

                Screw amendments, we can just argue that the second is referring to a person’s upper limbs. Besides, with the supreme court saying the president is above the law and states requiring the 10 commandments in schools, it’s pretty clear the Constitution doesn’t mean shit anyway.

            • lightnsfw@reddthat.com
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              4
              ·
              4 months ago

              There are 1.2 guns for every person in the united states and the homicide rate is 6.383 for every 100,000 people. It doesn’t break out homicides by guns vs. other methods but even if every homicide was using a gun that isn’t much of a correlation between gun ownership and murdering people. There are always other factors. If just guns made people commit homicide there would be bodies piled in the streets.

          • captainlezbian@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            4 months ago

            It’s also associated with domestic violence. Yes that’s a crime but it’s not the crime people are thinking of. And unfortunately that one is going to be the tricky one to resolve

            • lightnsfw@reddthat.com
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              4 months ago

              I think that would fall under expanding social services, either to give the abusee options to remove themselves from the situation or get the abuser into counseling early on before it gets more serious or a combination of the two. Personally I think a lot of violent assholes could be sorted out if everyone had to take counseling in high school and learn methods of dealing with their shit.

    • SupraMario@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      4 months ago

      Because Pandoras box is opened and there is no closing it. Criminals will get access to firearms even if they’ve all been banned. Gun control logic is like giving a bandaid to someone with cancer.

      We need to fix the why, not the how of our violence issue.

      We need to focus on social programs, single payer healthcare, our education system, prison and police reform, and ending the war on drugs. Just these things alone would drop our violence by 100xs what another useless gun control bill would do.

      • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        11
        ·
        4 months ago

        None of those things have anything to do with the type of violence or whether or not they know the victims.

        So that really doesn’t explain anything.

        This was not about whether or not a gun control discussion is worth having. This is about the relevance of the type of gun violence and whether or not the murderer and the victim new each other. What difference does it make?

        • SupraMario@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          10
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          4 months ago

          So what’s your question then? Most gun violence is not random. Hell most violence is not random. That’s what the public perceives though. Which causes the gun control issue to be heavily viewed as something its not. Hence the incessant need to act like another AWB would do anything to curb the violence. When in reality it would do absolutely jack shit, because the majority of gun deaths are via handguns.

          • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            10
            ·
            4 months ago

            I asked my question. You aren’t answering it.

            I will repeat it:

            Why does the type of gun violence matter? Why does it matter whether or not they know the victims?

            I don’t understand the relevance to the gun control discussion.

            You have made your opinion that there should be absolutely no discussion of gun control known many times, so maybe you weren’t the person I wanted an answer from. Especially when you weren’t the one I asked.

            Take your agenda elsewhere.

            • SupraMario@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              9
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              4 months ago

              I did answer your question. It matters because it is used as a agenda to make the public feel like we have random mass shootings daily. It %100 matters.

              This is why the GVA is bunk crap, because it twists the truth.

              I’ve never said that there should be no discussion of gun control. I just point out how little logic is behind the gun control that’s proposed, because it’s not based in reality.

              • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                8
                ·
                4 months ago

                No. No you didn’t. I also didn’t ask you and I don’t want your opinion because I know what your opinion is already.

                • SupraMario@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  6
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  4 months ago

                  I mean I did answer your question, you where just hoping for someone else to give you a different answer.

                  • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    3
                    arrow-down
                    6
                    ·
                    4 months ago

                    Correct, that’s why I asked them and not you.

                    And they answered it, unlike your claim to have answered it.

    • captainlezbian@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      4 months ago

      Because it’s a lot easier to tell yourself it’s ok when it’s related to crime, domestic violence, or some other form of intentionally targeted killing. That doesn’t make it ok, but people tell themselves they and their loved ones are safe.

      All it does is turns bad decisions and bad situations into tragedies. I have gun owners I like and respect, but I keep finding the people most invested in their guns are the people I trust least to have them.