384
Biden renews call for assault weapons ban after ‘tragic and senseless’ spate of July 4 shootings
(www.independent.co.uk)
this post was submitted on 05 Jul 2023
384 points (93.0% liked)
politics
19018 readers
3621 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! 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.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
The reality is that this is unlikely to happen even for what are colloquially coined "assault weapons" again - though it happened once, so I suppose it might... I recommend reading the article and I try to post it often to get the word out to more people. The best part is that it's likely to trigger hard left gun haters and hard-right gun fetishists alike, but lands on solid, pragmatic ground that I think most reasonable people in the US would agree with (and to, should it be pursued for law). All without banning anything and this is noted in the article since bans don't really work for the intended purpose when there are already hundreds of millions of guns like this for sale/trade in the US after such a go-forward ban.
alright, I read the article. As far as I can tell it's not proposing anything relevant to gun violence in America.
You're right it's unlikely to happen, in the same vein its unlikely the US will stop having third world levels of gun violence. The majority opinion of guns in America is admiration, and that's both the cause of all our gun violence, and the blockade to any efforts to address that violence. All I can do is be one opposition voice and try and convince others. What Americans are used to isnt normal in the rest of the developed world, and measures that are considered unachievable fantasy here are reality elsewhere.
I'm genuinely curious why you think that article does not propose anything relavant to gun violence. It's entirely about gun violence. And it's using conservative mentatlity, especially "Personal Responsibility" as well as NRA's own rules to recommend new laws governing that personal responsibility. And more to the point it's about changing (over time) exactly the mentality you point out about guns in the us. So I truly don't understand how that's not a practical starting point. The liklihood of removing guns entirely from the US like the UK or other countries is slim to none given the 2nd Amendment and political climate, and so to me that's tilting at wind mills.
All that being said, the analogy of drunk driving and the efforts to pass laws to force responsibility there have had both a massive impact on number of drunk driving incidents and certainly deaths. You can't stop people from violating the law, but you can hold them accountable is the point and now in the US after 40+ years of DUI/DWI laws, constant messaging, and consequences, you can see that minds have changed and society with it. People used to drink and drive as a matter OF COURSE - that just doesn't happen many places anymore in the US. Nobody took away cars, ability to drive, ability to drink, but you combine those and you're likely getting put in Jail. Certainly if you do it more than once. I'd characterize it as people now caring about this on a whole in society where in the 50's/60's/70's it was rampant.