this post was submitted on 20 Nov 2023
320 points (99.7% liked)

News

28765 readers
4920 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] stifle867@programming.dev 157 points 1 year ago (2 children)

This could have been prevented if there was a good toddler with a gun.

[–] squaresinger@feddit.de 63 points 1 year ago (4 children)

The toddlers need gun training. If every toddler had a gun, stuff like this wouldn't happen.

[–] Diplomjodler@feddit.de 27 points 1 year ago

The solution is obviously to try toddlers as adults.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Artyom@lemm.ee 32 points 1 year ago

Or if we just had mental health programs for toddlers, we wouldn't have any issues with giving toddlers guns!

[–] the_q@lemmy.world 73 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Another responsible gun owner!

[–] tetris11@lemmy.ml 27 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (6 children)

Sad thing is is that there are probably many responsible gun owners, but its the jackasses that get publicized and drawn into the public eye.

Though, that's how it should be. It just takes one reckless owner to ruin several people's lives. That's an incredibly low margin of error, and people should talk about it.

[–] Pratai@lemmy.ca 46 points 1 year ago (1 children)

EVERYONE is a responsible gun owner until they aren’t.

[–] tetris11@lemmy.ml 16 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Same with car drivers though, no?

[–] Pratai@lemmy.ca 42 points 1 year ago (11 children)

Don’t even start with that bullshit. Cars are necessary and aren’t manufactured for the purpose of killing.

[–] tetris11@lemmy.ml 13 points 1 year ago

That's fair

[–] lennybird@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

And any dumbass who tries to equate the two to justify mass firearm proliferation, just tell them to defend their homes with cars and knives just the same.

Then they'll raise their hands and go, "whoa whoa, hey now..."

[–] mapiki@lemm.ee 5 points 1 year ago (4 children)

Cars are not technically necessary. But we regulate them heavily - through licensing, safety tests, and policing. And your license can be pulled or suspended so that you cannot drive.

Why? Because they are deadly. Just because something isn't created to kill (say... To protect your family? To get you to your job?) doesn't mean it can't kill.

Sadly, we live in a country where freedom and rights are valued more than community and respect.

But as the welcome to nightvale NRA says: "Guns don't kill people. We're all invincible and it's a miracle." (Podcast.)

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (8 replies)
[–] SturgiesYrFase@lemmy.ml 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

That's a no to this and the comment you're replying to

[–] tetris11@lemmy.ml 10 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (5 children)

I'm not pro-gun, or pro-car, or anything that is a detriment to society. I vote progressively, donate to digital rights groups, and contribute money and code to open source projects. I believe in a better world.

Okay, with that out of the way, I'm looking for an argument I can use against a gun owner to tell them that they should not own a gun.

School shootings and dead kids is somehow not enough to convince them, because of the claim that its a minority of reckless users who are the problem. I am looking for other arguments I can use, and I will question arguments that seem weak or inconsistent to me.

Apologies if the car argument is often used by them, it came to me on the spur of the moment. Clearly it was a bad argument.

[–] squaresinger@feddit.de 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

That puts your original comment into perspective.

I don't think there is an argument that could convince someone who wears their gun like it's a religion. They see that as part of their identity, and you can't change that with simple logic.

[–] tetris11@lemmy.ml 5 points 1 year ago (3 children)

I guess I live in the hope that we're all human beings capable of being reasoned with

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Wirrvogel@feddit.de 7 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I’m looking for an argument I can use against a gun owner to tell them that they should not own a gun.

I don't think there is a universal argument against it that will work with everyone. Find out why they actually want a gun (not what they tell others on the surface) and check if there is a way they can get what they need without it.

If they have a gun because it makes them feel more "manly" then no argument will help, telling them they don't need a gun to be a man could. If they feel insecure and threatened, helping them to find other ways to feel secure and safe again will help. It could be group pressure, it could be anything.

If you can't make them give away the gun, maybe you can make them put it behind a lock, gun and ammunition separated at least. That would keep everyone more save. Sometimes it is all one can do, but it would have hindered this accident to happen.

[–] SturgiesYrFase@lemmy.ml 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

My only gripe with what you said is that there are legitimately irresponsible drivers and irresponsible gun owners. I don't think there's anything you can say to most Americans who own a gun to get them to not. Guns are so tied to the American image, it's not a tool, or a hobby...it's a fetish, a symbol of belonging to the group.

The car argument isn't a bad one, but saying that everyone is responsible until they're not is a falsehood.

A better way to phrase it might be something along the lines of:
Even responsible drivers can make an error, and a single error, one split second of inattentiveness, can destroy the lives of so many people. Now consider how many people are irresponsible drivers.

[–] tetris11@lemmy.ml 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Even responsible drivers can make an error, and a single error, one split second of inattentiveness, can destroy the lives of so many people. Now consider how many people are irresponsible drivers.

This is a good one to use, my thanks.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[–] marx2k@lemmy.world 61 points 1 year ago (2 children)
[–] Buffalox@lemmy.world 35 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Since when did USA become so anti freedom?
The toddler is clearly part of a militia, to prevent government oppression.
So he has every right to carry and fire whatever weapon in whichever place and direction he chooses.

[–] randombullet@feddit.de 57 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Needs to be changed to negligent discharge.

There are no accidents, just negligence.

Unless there is hardware failure, but that's a different story

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 16 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Sorry... you think letting a toddler get ahold of your loaded gun isn't child endangerment?

[–] trash80@lemmy.dbzer0.com 37 points 1 year ago (1 children)

They are saying it should be characterized as negligent instead of accidental.

https://www.usacarry.com/accidental-discharge-negligent-discharge/

We’ll start off by saying no, accidental discharges and negligent discharges are not interchangeable and do not mean the same thing. But they both can happen. I’ve seen the term accidental discharge used by the media and firearm owners when they should have used the term negligent discharge.

Let’s take a look at the definitions of both:

  • Accidental: happening by chance, unintentionally, or unexpectedly.
  • Negligent: failing to take proper care in doing something.
[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Okay, but she's been charged with child endangerment...

[–] trash80@lemmy.dbzer0.com 25 points 1 year ago

They aren't saying that she shouldn't be charged with child endangerment.

[–] kn33@lemmy.world 16 points 1 year ago

Yeah, but they're not talking about the legal charge. They're talking about the use of the word "accidently" in the title. It's not an accident, it's negligence.

[–] Fedizen@lemmy.world 24 points 1 year ago (2 children)

ohio, the florida of the northeast.

[–] Chainweasel@lemmy.world 15 points 1 year ago

As an Ohioan, I've been calling it "Cold Florida" for years.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] ShunkW@lemmy.world 23 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Of course it was in Waverly. That Walmart is always full of insane people who shouldn't have weapons, but you know they do. Used to pass through on my way to my hometown and refused to stop there after a few incidents with good old boys because I'm a gay dude who had very long hair back then.

[–] ivanafterall@kbin.social 12 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I'm not sure any of those things are unique to that particular Walmart.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] aeronmelon@lemm.ee 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I understand, but you've described greater than half of all Walmarts.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] mctoasterson@reddthat.com 16 points 1 year ago (2 children)

This sounds about right for a Taurus owner.

[–] Mr_Blott@lemmy.world 13 points 1 year ago

Imagine being able to narrow it down that much when the rest of us go "That sounds right for an American" 🙄

[–] negativeyoda@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Not a gun person. Is that the Karen gun or something?

[–] mctoasterson@reddthat.com 18 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Taurus, and this model in particular, is known as a cheap piece of shit probably purchased and carried by someone lacking intellect and sophistication... You know, the type who would have the thing sloshing around unattended in a purse, with no holster.

[–] JAC@reddthat.com 14 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I thought it was about the Ford Taurus. Lol

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] BigMacHole@lemm.ee 12 points 1 year ago

It's a good thing that Toddler had a gun! Imagine if a gunman had decided to shoot up that Wal Mart! The Toddler could Protect itself!

[–] ivanafterall@kbin.social 11 points 1 year ago

"Accidentally."

That boar population is outta control, huh?

[–] GreenMario@lemm.ee 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments