this post was submitted on 20 Aug 2023
83 points (100.0% liked)

U.S. News

2244 readers
3 users here now

News about and pertaining to the United States and its people.

Please read what's functionally the mission statement before posting for the first time. We have a narrower definition of news than you might be accustomed to.


Guidelines for submissions:

For World News, see the News community.


This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
top 10 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] furrowsofar 44 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Great example why guns are just bad. To many impulsive and abusive people with them. More guns, more death.

[–] Overzeetop 35 points 1 year ago (8 children)

Oh, now, don't be rash. Guns don't people, people kill people, or so I'm told. We should just remove guns from the "bad" people.

Based on my observations, disallowing (checks notes) males from owning or operating guns would seem to be a near universal solution.

[–] furrowsofar 16 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I think we all know that more guns mean more gun deaths. The stats are pretty clear as a whole.

It is a pretty small group of people that actually own guns to make them safer. Majority it is to feel safer while making them and everyone around them less safe. That is my big issue with guns. Not gun ownership itself... just nutty ownership.

[–] CeruleanRuin@lemmings.world 7 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

50% of the population, commits 90% of the homicides. Huh. 🤔

[–] reric88 7 points 1 year ago

There are other self-defense options as well. Lethal firearms could be entirely replaced by non-lethal. If you actually need it for defense, you can still defend yourself with it, but you're going to have a hard time using it for murder now.

You could argue that this would increase the amount of defender deaths because they couldn't neutralize the threat 100%, but it would drastically lower lethal firearm related crimes. Gotta weigh the options.

I'm all for self defense at a distance, I don't want to have to risk a scuffle. If someone invades my home in the night, I don't want to have to fight them. I want them stopped asap with as little force as possible for the safety of everyone, including the invader.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] Penguincoder 11 points 1 year ago

If it really was over a FLAG and what it stands for, that's some insecure attitude.