this post was submitted on 18 Mar 2024
368 points (100.0% liked)

News

27787 readers
4129 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
 

At least 157 people were killed and 270 were injured last year in unintentional shootings by children, according to Everytown, an advocacy group for firearm safety.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 78 points 1 year ago (2 children)

This is what happens when everyone has easy access to children.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 year ago

The real question is, how many did they intentionally shoot and kill?

I'll see myself out

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 44 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Make sure your kids are carrying so they can protect themselves incase some kid is carrying. 🤡

[–] [email protected] 16 points 1 year ago

No no, you got it wrong, give parents guns to defend against rioting children

[–] [email protected] 23 points 1 year ago (3 children)

I really wish more gun owners would embrace the concept of safe storage. Unfortunately between the "Muh Rights" bozos, the ignorant, and the outright criminal there's too many opportunities for kids to come into unsupervised contact with weapons.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Gun owner here in support of safe storage laws. I do think the argument of "the gun should be easily accessible" is valid, only if you don't have kids or anyone that shouldn't have access living with you. But at the same time, having the gun accessible doesn't really matter unless it's literally on you 24/7.

I am for safe storage laws because I don't think the outcome would change much in favor of the gun owner, rather homes with firearms would be safer when they're not accessible by kids or people that shouldn't access them.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Yep. The likelihood of a gun accident happening is much higher than the likelihood that you'll need and be near your firearm in a home invasion scenario. Houses are generally robbed when no one is home, and one of the most likely things stolen is your firearm. It's much more likely to still be there if it's secured properly.

Edit: Also, don't use 1776 for the combination of your gun safe. It's essentially useless if you do.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I've got some issues with safe storage laws, but they're mostly about the inadequacy of the containers that they allow for.

The quick and dirty version is that, at best, safe storage laws require a residential security container (RSC), which is not very secure. It will stop curious kids, but will not stop an older kid that has time on their hands, or is determined and willing to use a destructive attack (e.g., a prybar). If you have a hammer and a long screwdriver, you can probably open most containers that are approved under safe storage laws. An actual gun safe is expensive as fuck, starting at about $5000 and going waaaaaaaaay up; a gun safe will stop pretty much everyone except a professional thief that is personally targeting you.

But the part that really chaps my ass is that RSCs are not only expensive for how little protection they offer, but it's frustratingly hard to even figure out how to compare them against each other if they aren't UL listed. Sometimes the lock on the RSC will be listed, but not the container. Sometimes they'll have a fire rating, but won't have anything for the lock or the resistance to destructive attacks. Unless you find an expert--and there aren't many working at big box sporting goods stores--you won't have any idea what kind of protection you're paying a few thousand dollars for.

EDIT - even after all of that, a safe storage law needs to have some kind of financial incentive built in, like a $1000 tax credit for the the purchase of a container that meets state criteria. Otherwise they're going to seem unreasonably expensive to many people.

[–] [email protected] 21 points 1 year ago

We need more good kids with guns! /s

[–] [email protected] 15 points 1 year ago (6 children)

This is why you should teach gun safety to kids in schools. In the US, kids are going to find guns, because some owners are going to be lazy, careless, or just tired and not thinking straight. Things like, if you find a gun, get an adult, a gun is always loaded, even if you think you unloaded it, or never, ever point a gun at something you don't intend to shoot.

Parents should teach their kids this stuff, just like parents should be teaching their kids of sex and healthy relationships. But parents aren't, and so schools need to step into the gap.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (7 children)

Yes. That's the only answer. Accommodate the gun fetish. Of course.

Must be hard to downvote me with one hand stroking a gun and the other down your pants.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 year ago (2 children)

So....don't teach children about gun safety?

[–] [email protected] 11 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Toddlers are shooting themselves and others. So maybe education needs to start in the maternity ward?

How about, and I know, it's crazy, but you could try not having guns in residential homes. It's insane, I know, but there's this really weird thing where the rest of the world manages it and their children (so bizarrely) aren't blowing their faces off on a regular basis

Nuts, hey...

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Gun control would be nice but...we are talking about in the here and now. Right now....guns are in homes. We are suggesting we should at least do everything we can to teach children those guns are dangerous. You do get that right?

Someone set that building over there on fire! Lets put the fire out!!

NO! WE MUST MAKE STRONGER LAWS AGAINST ARSON!

Thats....basically how this comment chain is going dude.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago (4 children)
[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago (6 children)

So...just gonna gloss over everything else. Remove guns all together and, until we can get to that point, we must do absolutely nothing else to at least hopefully prevent these deaths?

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago (2 children)

A very small percentage of children.

There are more age groups of children than just toddlers.

I personally support laws requiring gun owners to properly store firearms.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Abstinence only gun safety

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 year ago

Yes, because that's what's happening. Accommodating a gun fetish. That's 100% not an intentionally inaccurate misrepresentation of what they said.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 year ago (3 children)

I never understood why firearms safety classes were done away with in schools. Nearly every middle and high school had a shooting club for most of the US's history.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 year ago (7 children)

Because guns scary bad.

And I mean that seriously.

People in urban areas--which is most of the country's population--almost exclusively experience firearms as being part of a criminal act. Most people that live in cities don't know people that hunt, or compete in marksmanship, but they hear about murders and shootings in their city all the time. Why do you need training in firearms in schools when the only use--the only use they have consistent exposure to--is criminal?

You can look at electoral maps and see this; most of the geographical area is red/Republican/conservative (typically pro-2A), while most of the population centers where people actually live are blue/Democratic/more liberal. If you went back 50 or 100 years, you'd see more people living in rural areas, which ended up meaning that there were more people that were exposed to hunting, etc.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

This is completely correct.

What's funny is, banning guns is only going to take them away from responsible gun owners.

Gangbangers in cities are still going to have their guns. But now someone on a farm who needs it for their protection isn't going to be allowed to have one? That's a load of bullshit and why gun control legislation exists solely to distract useful idiots from the real problems they face.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I'm a firm believer in addressing and correcting the underlying causes of violence rather than removing the tools. For instance, Chicago had a violence intervention program a few years back, and it was having a noticeable impact on rates of violence. It was targeting at-risk kids, and helping them get their shit together. And so, predictably, the city cut the funding for it.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 year ago (2 children)

It's almost like normalising access to guns from a young age is part of your country's issue with shooting each other all the time.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago (2 children)

The issue is people who feel like they have nothing to lose taking their frustration out on society.

It's why there are other nations with comparable gun ownership rates as the US without comparable amounts of gun violence.

Congratulations, though. You're doing what the ruling class wants: squabbling over bullshit to distract you from the real issues.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago

The shootings kinda started when normalization stopped. Now they all still have access but the normalcy is gone, they're a symbol of power not a tool.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago

In the US, kids are going to find guns, because some owners are going to be lazy, careless, or just tired and not thinking straight.

Then the conditions for being a gun owner are vastly too permissive and the punishments for negligence are vastly too light.

The fact that you just skipped straight over this to blame schools and parents shows that your opinions are already hopelessly compromised by pro-gun rhetoric.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I think we should teach gun safety in schools because people have to rely on themselves for their own protection.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 14 points 1 year ago (2 children)

How many citizens did police shoot and kill last year? I think around 2200....

Is this headline a bad thing? Yes. Is it some CRISIS OF GUNS IN MURICA like these comments saying? No.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago

There's also way more guns and kids than police. Even at 4 people per day, there are a lot of people that ignore the police problem.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 13 points 1 year ago

How many did those murderous little snots kill intentionally, though?

[–] [email protected] 12 points 1 year ago (2 children)

This organization has proven time and time again to be an unreliable source of information.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Do you happen to have any sources on the subject? I'm not familiar with the organization

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago (5 children)

It's obvious who "The Organization" is. 👀

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

With guns that were unsecured because their owners lacked the minimum mental capacity that should be a basic requirement to own a gun in the first place.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

I remember on a show (I forget what it was, but its related to court cam but with active police answering calls), and a baby (Im pretty sure it was a 3 year old) somehow got ahold of a gun, got outside of the apartment, and was aiming it a doors.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I'll bring this up next time someone asks me why I don't have kids.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago
[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago

Don’t listen to Everytown. She cheated on her husband.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

We need to start training infants how to use guns! It is the only solution!

.

.

/S if it wasn't clear enough

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago (4 children)

He's just flexing for his tribe, lol.

Probably one of the "I hate cops, I hate guns, and I also can't fight" crew.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago

The solution is obviously to try kids as adults.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago

Or you mean now that the facade of the US has been eroded and the racist violent cess pool that is truly there is exposed, less people want to dedicate their life there... Wow, what a concept. You find almost anyone who wants to go to the US that comes from a country that functions. The US is literally the last choice or an outright refusal.

It is of course still a fantastically popular destination for those where the soft power propaganda of Hollywood works, or are escaping true poverty and crime. Something is much better than what they have. The rest of the developed world however, has developed much further.

The only, and literally only, things I've ever heard about the US in a positive light in the past few years is the high income potential and beautiful natural parks. The parks is a load of crap. Beauty like that exists all over the world, but it isn't marketed as well as the US or as famous by movies. Fair enough excuse to visit.

High income potential is the only upside. And with remote work anyone who can work for a US company to pocket the paycheque and live outside its borders, that's the new American dream.

load more comments
view more: next ›