Quite possibly the most astute thing I’ve seen on 4chan.
Green texts that reach the outside are usually pretty astute, political comment, alternative humor or sharp social commentary. See !4chan@lemmy.world
Exactly, no one is sharing the deranged off the wall shit on here because anything that doesn’t fit the dominant narrative on Lemmy is pretty quickly downvoted.
That said, I did upvote this post lol
deleted by creator
It’s just a thousand monkeys at typewriters in there.
Occasionally you get a work of Shakespeare in all the gibberish.
While we should have better access to mental (and physical) health care, that’s probably not going to fix the too frequent “Someone knocked on my door so i shot them” murders that happen too often.
It also won’t solve the “and then the police shot him” murders.
There are a lot of things wrong with the US and its dominant culture. I’d say most of the blame and the blood is on conservatives. Which makes a kind of sense - if you have a shitty system and you are fighting to keep it as is, you’re probably a shitty person with shitty takes making the world worse.
If someone just thanos snapped away the conservatives, or at least the authoritarian subset of them, many problems would vanish overnight.
The “funny” thing about the police shooting people for having guns is that it essentially means Americans don’t actually have the right to own/carry guns. They only have the right to buy them.
Police cannot shoot you (legally) for carrying, now whether they follow the law is a different matter
They just claim they feared for their life and now they’re declared not guilty. There is no specific law saying they can just shoot you for having a gun, but there’s plenty of other laws, precedents etc. making it absolutely legal for them to shoot you for having a gun.
Of course, this is why body cams are one of the greatest innovations in policing.
Even if you don’t have a gun it’s a problem, if you are are stopped by police for a random check^1. You are asked for your license and registration papers. You move your hand 1 cm to get it, cop suddenly realizes you could theoretically have a gun, then decides to shoot you first because self defense.
The possibility that literally everyone can have a firearm makes living there so much more dangerous compared to not having the option of shooting back whenever it would be needed for actual self defense.
^1 probability for random police checks has an inverse proportionality to the whiteness of one’s skin color.
Healthcare is unobtainable for most, housing is now a pipe dream for most, prosperity falling apart, working until you die. “We need to incarcerate all the drug addicts and kill the crazy people”.
If only the mass shooters would just target the rich instead of the general public, but I agree with you. A Thanos snap on a good chunk of the conservatives would fix a ton of shit.
That thanos snap better take care of a all the very corrupt politicians and unchecked capitalists as well pretty please.
Healthcare is unobtainable for most,
What do you mean?
housing is now a pipe dream for most,
What do you mean?
I guess it’s not technically unobtainable, it just puts you into financial ruin to utilize healthcare. I call that unobtainable if you’re trying to be financially responsible.
When I look at housing and I see that it has to consume %50 or more of people’s annual budget, that means young people need to earn around 115-150k/yr in order to become homeowners, and that’s only after banks have shifted the goal posts. Young professionals are also much more likely to be saddled with 30-65k of student debt.
When you combine that with the inflation spike that happened last year, and the rising rents, there’s many people earning only $25/hr but rent is $2k/month.
Just fucking good times. The next spike will probably be the suicide rates.
It is not only the authoritarian conservatives that want gun rights
We all know if that happened the democrats would fuck it up. They’d stop everything they were working on and set up conservation efforts for conservatives. They’d have musicians raise awareness of the unprecedented threat the conservatives are under and tell everyone where they can donate to those left griftless. The real shitty thing is that without the Republicans around to fuck it up it’ll probably actually work.
Oh I long for the day we can tour a historical conservative town reenactment.
“Over here, notice the giant American flag, and even more prominent Trump 2024 flag. On the other side, a comically large truck requiring a ladder to enter, believe it or not, these were often chosen for low fuel efficiency and modified for extra pollution. Up ahead we see a teenager who has just been kicked out of their parent’s house for being gay, a house containing a meth lab, six churches, and a neighbor wielding an AR-15 ‘just in case’.”
Mental health is a scapegoat for discrediting people via appeal to authority fallacy.
When is enough going to be enough?
The 2nd Amendment was a mistake. It’s time to repeal it.
It has taken on a life of its own and has been twisted to the breaking point by gun nutters. It is never enough for them and any push back is like pulling teeth. They have become the terrorist at this point and there is no reason to negotiate anymore.
See it from their perspective: every time they’ve given an inch, grabbers took a mile. If you want to get concessions you’re going to need to give some too.
Oh I have, but they are just wrong
deleted by creator
Dunno, how do you convince a racist person not to be racist? A flat-earther that the world is round? An anti-abortionist that birth control is the most effective way to prevent abortion?
The answer is you don’t. They are just wrong.
deleted by creator
When women got the right to vote did they try and rationalize with the misogynist? Maybe they could meet them half way and say women only get half a vote instead of a full vote? Does that sound like a good compromise to you!
It is like every major social change could have never happened because they would have to “enforce what they thought was right”. Slaves would need to convince the slavers and find some middle ground. Maybe be slaves half the year to appease them.
The problem is your are not only dealing with someone who is wrong in the case of gun nutters but they are daring you to come get their precious guns threatening your life. It is in essence terroristic in nature. There is no compromise with terrorists.
So yes, we tell them they are wrong. We grow up and stop giving in to terrorists. Laws are changed but more importantly society changes. Those that can reflect on this and accept they were wrong change or maybe the rest all die of old age. We move on and get past this.
It will never be enough. Look at the responses in this thread and elsewhere. It will never be enough. There is no price too high that it won’t happily be paid. There is no regulation small enough that it will be accepted. They have made that exceptionally clear.
There is no negotiation with them. You will never convince them. It doesn’t matter if the regulation works or not.
deleted by creator
I don’t even think it’s a might-makes-right issue yet. They have guns, sure. But that’s still basically nothing in the face of government force.
My point was more along the lines of that in all of these gun control discussions, there are mistaken expectations from a lot of liberal people.
Liberals keep engaging in this conversation as if it were a negotiation between reasonable people trying to find common ground. That if the cost of a lack of regulation grows too high, that if they make the right arguments, that if they offer the right compromises, they can move towards moderate gun control.
But that’s not what’s happening. The gun lobby has repeatedly shown that any regulation, no matter how small, will be viewed the same way as a complete forcible disarming, and will be opposed with the same vigour. And that there is no cost of human life that will ever change that.
For the 2nd Amendment types, the conversation is already over. Everything they say is meaningless, because they don’t actually care if what they say is true, they don’t care if the regulation works or not. They are just saying things to shut down the discourse, and if you counter them, they’ll just move on to the next point like nothing has changed. Because to them nothing has changed.
That’s not going to happen in the lifetime of anyone who can read this comment.
Because it requires more than a majority of Congress, it also requires 3/4 of the 50 states to vote to ratify it. Only takes 13 states voting NO to prevent it, and there are plenty more red states than that who would never give up our rights so foolishly.
Biden: “I like ice cream”
Trump: “I did everything right, and they indicted MEeeeee”
The perfect phone call
We need better options.
Centrists: “No but really, trans people playing sports is a massive problem, one that we should devote many resources to solving.”
pretend all victims are in a better place while pocketing NRA dues like no tomorrow
We’re not going to stop them. They are an emergent phenomenon of American society. So many things would have to change that this country would be unrecognizable. Which might be awesome… but it’s not going to happen anytime soon.
Britain, Australia, Canada, New Zealand, and Norway all had a culture of gun ownership, went through a mass shooting, put severe restrictions on gun ownership, and had dramatic drops in gun violence. All those other countries have similar mental illness rates and other things people blame mass shootings on.
Canada is not a great example though. Liberals put in bills for gun ownership restrictions and Conservatives remove it when they get into power.
Those restrictions didn’t do anything because they targeted the groups of guns and owners who aren’t actually being used in crime or shooting people.
There are sane things you can do that actually help, like requiring safety courses and having regular background checks. Canada already does this and the Conservatives didn’t touch this.
Then there are things which arguably do not increase safety but do increase burdens on gun owners and society, like forcing people to register bolt-action hunting rifles (used very rarely in crime), or secure an ATT (Authorization To Transport) every time you want to move a gun literally anywhere, including to hunt or shoot at the range. These are the things the Conservatives changed to make less overbearing because no one could prove they actually help and they were costing a great deal of money. Fun fact: restricted guns are still registered in Canada, and that includes nearly all legal handguns.
The issue is that attempting gun restrictions will cause an extremely violent backlash. The reality is that the United States is going to face ever more violence before enough people suffer enough to change.
Yeah man. I’m not saying that guns aren’t the main issue. We have more guns than people here. It isn’t gonna change though-- especially not right now. Gun purchasing seems to be accelerating if anything. Yes, if you or I could snap our fingers and have all guns disappear, that would do it. Actually getting from where we are now to where those other countries are does not seem like a very clear or likely path. I simply cannot imagine the US as we know it becoming that other place.
When Australia banned semi-auto firearms and handguns for general ownership, I was hearing about hiding guns from gun owners around me
If they did, they’ve kept it quiet, and probably left them buried
But really almost all the banned guns were sold to the government during the buy back, and due to the amnesty many previously illegal weapons were also turned in
It went really well as the worst people for owning guns also really wanted the cash for turning them in, and if they hide them, they’re hiding them against an imagined future crash, and cannot really bring them out normally
Genocide is part of our culture
Yup, sure is. The USA wouldn’t exist without it.
Republicans don’t deserve the lives they live.
Nobody deserves anything. Deserving is the shittest concept. I deserve to die because life is shit, but nobody will help.
I’m pretty sure I deserve at least a million bucks but you do you
A million bucks?! You know what you could do with that money? Two chicks, man.
You know what I’d do with a million bucks? Nothing. I’d relax, I would sit on my ass all day, I would do nothing.
Well you don’t need a million bucks to do nuthin’. Hell, look at my cousin, he’s dead broke, don’t do shit.
but nobody will help
Haven’t you been reading this thread? The police will help
🤣
removed by mod
Do republicans not like bombing Muslims?
those poor poor muslim cinamon rolls, never hurt nobody
Ah. A moron. Hello there, moron.
It’s a bipartisan sentiment
Bruh… That’s republicans, always has been.
Remember that time Trump banned bump stocks in a weekend, something Obama tried for 8 years to do? If not, here’s the NPR article on it
Why is this relevant? What point are you trying to make here? You seem a little lost and confused.
So you’re saying MAGAts eat shit as long as daddy trump feeds it to them?
Unflinching support of Israel’s ongoing genocide is sadly one of the few things R and D parties seem to agree on.
Getting rid of guns isn’t the solution, we have 3D printers allowing anyone to make a gun at home. Banning guns won’t stop crimimals from using them. Criminals don’t follow laws.
Seriously…. STFU.
Sincerely, a guy whose been 3d printing almost half his life.
First, people are perfectly able to manufacture their own firearms without additive manufacturing of any stripe. Linking ghost guns to 3d printing is a red herring brought to you by technophobic morons and shit-tier journalism from a slow news day. You can buy the needed stuff at any big box hardware store, tools inlcuded, for less than a printer costs.
Secondly, while it is entirely possible to produce firearms with printers… the people who are able to do so, are completely capable of doing it the other way.
Third, 3d printing has a fully international community. Given that criminals exist in every nation; you’d see ghost guns…. Everywhere.
Finally, the vast majority of ghost guns were in fact legally manufactured, and either purchased through stupid-as-fuck private sale exemptions; using straw buyers; or were originally stolen.
So yes, improving gun control laws would in fact make a difference.
Plus mass shootings aren’t even relevant statistically as a cause of death, but heart disease and car accidents are but I don’t see anyone up in arms over banning McDonald’s or Ford. I will never support any kind of infringement on my gun rights, no red/yellow flag laws, no national background checks, no mag capacities. Democrats just need to stop treating every mass shooting as an excuse to limit our 2nd amendment rights even more.
It only happens every day if you include gang shootings. But that goes against your narrative.
Ah well, just a lot of whining libs then ey?
Nobody tell this guy what per capita means. He might blown his own mind.
Our collective iq goes up if he does
Maybe…
How the hell does what I said have anything to do with per capita? The OP is an image claiming a mass shooting every single day of the week?. That has no correlation with per capita statistics.
Normally, I’m of the opinion that there’s no such thing as a dumb question. But you’re really pushing the line with this.
-
that would be a time-based correlation
-
it’s not even true
-
aaaaand that’s how disposeable everyone is to these guys, yaaaaaaaay!
Criminals chose that life.
Gang shootings often kill bystanders as much as ‘criminals’. Do you really think a 15 year old gang member in a rough place where shootings are common had a lot of choice? A lot of ‘gang shootings’ are by kids.
More legal gun owners means less gang members eventually. I’m all for them finding out after fucking around.
I just want less people shot and killed in general but alright then
Please, a) give me a source for that, and b) tell me why that changes the point.
You seriously think mass shootings happen every single day of the week? Why the hell would I need a source contradict such a and insane statement? The problem these days is that a “mass shooting” is not some unprovoked crime by a nut job shooting up a school. It’s two or more people. That also includes gangland shootings between gangs. Current gun laws already completely restrict them from owning guns as criminals so I see no point in even discussing that.
You see no point in discussing that when there’s steps that can be taken to control the flow of guns to criminals? And you see no reason to discuss every other mass shooting?
If the steps involve removing fundamental rights from me and other US citizens than there is no conversation to be had. The answer is no.
if they remove your fundamental rights, you know, just shoot 'em up
In case you didn’t know, that was one of the original intents of the second amendment. The ability to fight against a government that has become tyrannical.
lolololol you guys vs F32s
Ah right, so explain how a group of even 50 well trained individuals, (no military careers among them, because that’s the point) is going to stop the US Military in the mountains of Appalachia? Between satellite feeds, drones, missile, artillery batteries, and armored vehicles like the MRAP, what exactly is an armed insurrection going to do? I would remind you that, over 100 years ago the us military was already good enough to win a war where nearly half the US went to war with itself, as a second military, and lost. They were, more or less, equally armed as their opponents in terms of weapons (each individual engagement was decided by skill and numbers, not by what weapons they used) and the south were blockaded into surrender. With the reunification, and 100+ years since it has only gotten stronger, to say nothing of the entrance of the Atomic and Digital Ages.
If the us government wants to stomp on the US people by force, it’s had the capability for over 70 years now. Since that time a re-examination should have happened to either reaffirm the laws and ammendments set forth, or altered them. You can’t reasonably say “then the military should not have X” because that puts the country at a disadvantage on a world stage.
These ammendments were written when it took 30 seconds or more to reload a black powder cartridge. These ammendments were written when you couldn’t send an object into orbit and hang there to watch other humans. It was written when slavery was codified and the norm. Since this document was written we have passed a dozen ammendments to it. Theres not “no way to change the second ammendment” there’s only people willing to allow it to be changed. Nowadays we don’t have issues with feeding colonies, or how to reach a gold rush in them-there moun’ns. We live in a time where more people live in new york city than the founding fathers wrote the document to rule over as a country.
The second ammendment, among the others, is outdated for a different time. It was written to prevent something that, quite frankly, isn’t an issue these days. At the time yeah it was all the rage to have yourself an Independance War because the governing country was oppressive. As was made apparent during the Civil War, and is true now - the average citizens uprising to overthrow the government for any reason won’t happen without military support anyway. And that means military hardware. You only get military hardware from defectors or thieves, neither of which are going to fight a us army base like it’s GTA to get ahold of it.
Rights are made up. If we say you don’t have “the right” to own particular weapons in particular cases, then you don’t.
What does well regulated militia mean?
What does “the right of the people” mean? Because the militia (every able bodied man in the nation) should be kept well armed, we ensured the right of the people (everyone) to keep and bear arms.
You seriously don’t think there’s too much gun crime in the US? You seriously think that every person involved in every gang shooting has a prior record?
Sure, I’ll concede that there isn’t a mass shooting every single day of every week every year. Congrats you win. But if you think there’s nothing wrong with our current gun laws when we have the highest rates of gun crime, and if you think that even the occasional mass shooting involving little kids is just “the cost of keeping our rights” then frankly I see no further point in engaging with you. And don’t for a second think that means you’ve won, it means you’ve already lost to the propaganda machine and have accepted loss of life as the cost of doing business. I’m not well trained enough to deprogram you.
What the fuck gun laws do you make to keep CRIMINALS who are not allowed to own or purchase guns from doing so? Any new gun law will have no affect on the criminals. Only those trying to defend themselves legally.
Not all gun crime is committed by previously convicted CRIMINALS. Do you think a high schooler getting ahold of dad’s gun and shooting up their school has been previously convicted?? Mental health issues for sure but an existing CRIMINAL record is doubtful.
And the whole good guys with gun stuff is absolute bullshit. Fat lot of good it does when the “good guys” wait outside while a shooting takes place because they’re too scared for their own lives to put their “good guy” guns to good use. So I guess your feelings must basically be fuck the victims then? Would you like to blame the victims while you’re at it? They picked a bad day to show up to class, should’ve stayed home right?
Get your head out of your ass and your ass out of the sand. This definitely isn’t some clear cut easy issue, but if you ask me the answer to world record levels of gun crime isn’t to sit back and do nothing because it might take a gun away from some theoretical, law abiding good guy.
And mind you, I am a law abiding gun owner. I’ve done sport shooting and a little hunting since I was old enough to take hunters safety. And guess what. I didn’t have to do a damn thing for my gun. No application, no permit, no mental health evaluation, no background check… I literally don’t have a driver’s license because that is more difficult to obtain than a fucking gun! If that’s not fubar to you then IMHO you’re hopeless. Sorry to be that way but idk how you even get so deep up inside the NRA’s asshole and I’m definitely not diving in to get you.
I believe in the second amendment and I know there are responsible gun owners out there. That does not automatically mean that people should die just so that I and others like me don’t have to go through some fucking paperwork to obtain something designed to kill.
A significant number of guns used in crimes are stolen from legal gun-owners. With legal guns less prevalent, the people you refer to would have less access to them as well. You could require better care in storage of guns, so that they can’t be stolen as easily. You could increase funding for combating illegal gun trafficking. I’m not saying these are good solutions to the issue, but there are a lot of things one could do through the law to help keep guns away from criminals.
They also can’t be stolen if they’re carried around by the owner and used to kill the person threatening people’s lives. Not enough finding out these days. Too many gang members expecting to just get a slap on the wrist. If they start dropping like flies we would hopefully see less gang members fucking around.
There is so much data from decades of crime research that shows that is not how crime prevention works.
One of the articles about the Maine shooter the other day claimed there had been 500 and something so far in 2023. That’s almost 2x per day.
That’s beyond stupid. You actually believe that? When you think mass shootings do you think sla nut job going into a school to kill people, or a drive by? Because that high figure is absolutely conflating the two.
Delete your account and fuck off back to reddit.
It sounds like all you want is an echo chamber. Plenty of those on Reddit. I haven’t been there in 8 years.
Cite your sources.
Are you honestly telling me you believe that there’s a mass shooting every day? I don’t think there’s been enough mass shootings as people think of them to fill out the month in the last 50 years.
No, I’m honestly telling you that I don’t believe your assertion that it’s all gangs. Seriously, cite your sources.
Source: A fox News opinion piece written by a guy driving through a city one time and heard a loud sound in the distance that could have been a gun shot.
Don’t forget there has also been some solid reporting by suburban facebook moms.
How many can he linked to crime or gang activity?
What do these two issues have to do with each other? I support gun control as well as fair sex-based separation in sports.
They’re related thanks to party politics. The party that talks about trans people in sports also rails against gun control.
Also, no one automatically knows what you mean when you say fair. Because of the nature of the debate, you don’t deserve the benefit of the doubt where people assume that when you say “fair” you only mean “trans women who have experienced male puberty need to undergo hormone therapy before being allowed to compete in women’s sports.” And even the people who politically advocate for that invariably wind up also supporting a ban on puberty blockers, or trans men in men’s sports, or never allowing trans women to compete no matter how thoroughly physically transitioned they are, or whatever other nonsense.
Bans are just not something that needs to be legislated. Sports organizations can self police in that regard. If anything, we need legislation to ensure trans people CAN compete in the gender category they identify as, with the sole exception of trans women who haven’t yet been able to medically transition.
Take chess, for example. FIDE just passed an insane set of rules around when trans women can compete in women’s tournaments, and how trans men have to give up any titles they earned while they were still presenting as female, but the gender divisions in chess are completely unrelated to inherent ability. The lack of women in chess is a cultural issue, like in STEM fields, not related to physical ability at all, and the women’s division ostensibly exists as an attempt to draw women to the game. What FIDE is doing is purely anti-trans, and there should be legislation keeping them from implementing that. I’ve no idea how that would work internationally, but the point is trans people need protection, not bans.
They’re related thanks to party politics. The party that talks about trans people in sports also rails against gun control.
And? Are you not allowed to support certain policies of one party and certain policies of another party? Especially if you live in a different country, so you’re not voting for either of them anyway?
In most sports, there is no such thing as “men’s” sports. You are allowed to participate no matter what you were born as and what you identify as. So why not just go there and leave women’s sports, which are explicitly created to make it possible to compete well without having been born with a male body, alone?
That said, I agree with you regaiding chess (which should not be considered a sport at all). There is no inherent advantage of having a male body in chess other than the general tendency of men to have a higher variance in most abilities.
Are you not allowed to support certain policies of one party and certain policies of another party? Especially if you live in a different country, so you’re not voting for either of them anyway?
I never even implied that. You came to a meme about American politics and asked how the two topics were related. Sorry not every meme is custom-made for you.
In most sports, there is no such thing as “men’s” sports.
… are you serious? All the most popular sports, running, swimming, weightlifting, football (American and the rest of the world), basketball, hockey, cycling… I decided to check out the Olympic’s website for some other examples and almost all of them have hard gender divisions. A few don’t but the vast majority are divided. Chess has an “open” and a “women’s” division as you describe, but again, it’s because the gap exists thanks only to a dearth of women playing the game in the first place. This is not the case in most sports. Trans women who have undergone sufficient hormone therapy do not have an advantage, and should be allowed to participate.
why not just go there and leave women’s sports, which are explicitly created to make it possible to compete well without having been born with a male body, alone?
People rarely just choose what they’re passionate about like that. This is an incredibly flimsy excuse to exclude people from competing in what they actually enjoy doing.
I never even implied that. You came to a meme about American politics and asked how the two topics were related.
The meme implies that the set of people opposing gun control is identical to the set of people opposed to trans women participating in women’s sports.
Trans women who have undergone sufficient hormone therapy do not have an advantage
How do you explain why Lia Thomas went from being mediocre at men’s swimming to getting the by far first place in women’s swimming?
exclude people from competing in what they actually enjoy doing
As far as I can tell, nobody is preventing trans women from participating in men’s sports. Though I can’t seem to find any sources, everyone talks about women’s sports. Do you happen to know ofeany?
clearly two years just wasn’t sufficient. that’s a person who trained all the way through a male puberty. but what a surprise, by “fair” you really did mean just preventing participation at all, im truly shocked
Do I have to repeat for the third time that transgender women are not prevented from participating in sports?
According to the downvotes, you’re not allowed to hold both of those opinions at the same time.
Stop that. Stop trying to have a reasonable stance in the middle.
Really though, I was under the impression that this was the somewhat reasonable stance that even progressive politicians have? I know that there’s scaremongering that DeMoCrAtS want big muscular men taking over women’s sports, tackling and hurting your daughters but I thought the actual stance was more along the lines of allowing the LGBTQ+ community to play sports while still allowing sports to be fair?
It definitely doesn’t seem like some super easy issue with a clear line in the sand that everyone will be ok with. And some of the scaremongering is certainly bigots being afraid of their children even interacting with someone that is LGBTQ+…
So, I’m legitimately curious, what are the actual stances of those on Lemmy?
Edit: keep down voting me while absolutely none of you are willing to engage and help educate me. I’m legitimately reaching out, asking, and trying to understand and all people can do is hit a down arrow. Fuck me for being an ally trying to trying to further my knowledge eh?
The issues are not opposing stances, no.
However the point of the post is that while children are being gunned down Republicans will go silent on solutions. However those same Republicans will gladly call on many other non-life threatening issues as a dog whistle or as a distraction tactic. They will ban every book, fire every openly gay person, ridicule every trans child - all because they are afraid of change. But they won’t even humor discussions on how to stop a child from catching a bullet.
Just because a political party does many bad things doesn’t automatically mean that everything they support is automatically wrong. Or do you also oppose animal rights because Hitler’s party supported them?
We’re actually averaging almost 2 per day this year so far.
The public indiscriminate kind, gang violence kind, or the 3 kids shot a gun once goofing off in their school parking lot kind?
public indiscriminate kind
What does that even mean? Indiscriminately killing people in public? Like a mass shooting? Lol
gang violence kind
“Person opens fire into church killing 5 and injuring 12”
“that’s a mass shooter”
“the gunman was wearing red and those killed wore blue”
“that’s gang violence”
Do you see how stupid that take is?
3 kids shot a gun once goofing off in their school parking lot kind
Oh my bad I thought you were being genuine, this is obviously bait, please carry on
Some lists of “mass shootings” include only the public indiscriminate kind, which is what basically everyone thinks of when they hear the phrase “mass shooting,” but some do include actual gang violence (turf war) or other violence based around other crime (drug deal gone bad). Your red shirt blue shirt scenario is cute, but that would still probably be the public indiscriminate kind. The two phenomena are very different.
There was an article from a big US news source a few years ago about how there had been over a hundred school shootings in the US that year. Can’t remember which source. The list of events included many that happened near a school or on school property but only incidentally. There was at least one where kids shot a gun in a school parking lot when no one else was around. Of course that’s still a problem, but again that’s a very different phenomenon than a “school shooting” where someone tries to murder 20 students. That’s why I brought that up.
Its strange you only hear about the big ones every month then.
On the bright side, at thanks to trans people, people finally give a shit about women’s sports. For incredibly bigoted and superficial reasons but hey the wnbc will take it.
They care for exactly long enough to write bans then they go back to mocking women’s sports. There’s no actual improvement.
Yes because our government is only equipped to deal with 1 issue at a time…
I mean, at this point? 1 might be a stretch.
