News
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. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. 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.
view the rest of the comments
Pretty cool suggesting at risk groups should stay vulnerable when their enemies are armed.
Interesting position you're taking.
General gun violence is unlike targeted political violence against minorities, so things like school shooting and gang violence stats mean nothing.
Comparing to Japan is irrelevant as there isn't an armed and empowered group publicly discussing hunting at risk folks there.
Pretending you care about human life when a hundred people die everyday from preventable gun violence is an interesting position you have taken.
Imagined political gun violence in your head or actual dead people. Clearly your imagination must take priority.
Oh it is not just Japan of course. But you knew that.
I never said the general preservation of human life was what I was discussing. Of course I'd prefer no one die at all.
I'd also prefer immigrants, lgbt+, and others wouldn't be hunted for who they are.
I clearly highlighted that an at risk group is trying to empower themselves due to the impending risk from actual threats made publicly against them.
Who am I (or you) to tell those folks they are in the wrong to reach for whatever tools they can access? (Be it speech, political action, or indeed self defence)
IM not worried (or therefore the actor in your suggested paranoid imaginings), because I'm not a member of a target group. The trick is I can empathize with their position, and I can recognize that although I'm not in a target group now, I sure could be in the future.
For those reasons I would never get in the way of folks defending themselves, especially when this group is interested in training and safe practices.
The people who "take priority" are those in harm's way, and we aren't the ones to tell them how to live right now, there hearing MORE them enough of that as it is
So you are a gun apologist who doesn't seem to care fifty thousand Americans needlessly die every year. If you do care I guess thoughts and prayers is all you got. Meanwhile no other civilized country has this problem.
Kids get bulletproof backpacks so they won't get shot in the back. Clearly, by your reasoning we should also be arming these kids.
All this so far is just about gun death as well. Not about the millions of partners who are threatened into staying by gun point. Not about all the people who have lost their loved ones to guns. Not all the maiming and injuries.
I am sure millions of people who live in fear of guns is worth those defense fantasies though. After all, once they are all armed there will be nothing to fear ever again.
I've made my point, you haven't addressed it.
You think you get to decide that THIS group doesn't get to join the rest. The rest are already armed, and of course that's a good discussion to have (reducing general gun violence.) But no, here's where you want to argue.
🙄
You created a defense fantasy in your head to justify moar guns. That is about it.
Oh, I have lots of ways to reduce gun violence. The problem is your reductionist argument that the only way to ensure equality is to make sure people are killed equally doesn't allow for it.
I am afraid you lost the argument high ground a long time ago my friend.
Observe, the person demonstrating lgbt+ getting guns is the redline squirms.
Edit this is just like when Reagan stirred up sentiments against lawful black ownership of firearms in California (before he was president). How odd he didn't raise broad societal concerns the year prior, or the year prior or the year prior
Late edit:
The conclusion is either you chose this thread, and this group to complain about "think of society" topics intentionally, or you are unwittingly aligned with the type of speech rightwing groups use to demonize legal expression of rights and self defence among minority groups. I'm a pessimist so I personally assume the former.
This is not the time/place, or referred to group to be lamenting the state of gun violence in America, unless you do so in bad faith.
"bounds"
If you're gonna be bigoted, at least have your ducks in the know
Flail
Washed
In fact,... Coming back to this:
The greatest example of anti capitalist, anti class oppression action in modern times happened due to private gun ownership.
To suggest self defence gun ownership is capitalist bootlicking is completely incoherent.
ownership is cheap, private, and a right.
One I'm happy to argue shouldn't be scolded away from LGBT folks because of other external concerns.
I never "pretended" to care about human life, I differentiated the conversation to it's root: minority group self defence.
Square that away then we can start boiling the ocean on overall violence. But not before at risk people have their rights maintained.
It's fun how you.never address the points r criticisms directly. Slippery!
Sorry that I don't feel like defense fantasy Larping with you.
You entered a thread about "queer people who are buying guns" and decided to lecture the group on how there's gun violence in America. The article discusses the unique motivations this and other at risk groups have, which I have echoed. You've decided the mentioned group is the group to lecture about gun violence, and conclude that this group should not acquire guns despite their right.
It's completely transparent why you are doing so, especially as you've provided zero discussion beyond lashing out at others.
On this topic (their fear and vulnerability [ their words, not mine] )... In what way have you been an ally to the mentioned group? You call their legitimate fears, and expression of their rights "larping", and attempt to shame them into obeisance by waving stats about crimes they have no intentions of commiting, deaths they have nothing to do with, in their faces.
Despicable.
There are legitimate times to discuss national gun violence (what's funny is we would be in agreement there). You could even have discussed other means of comfort/stability/protection they could consider as alternatives. Anything constructive at all. But you didn't do that, you slung mud/ guilt on an at risk group in a time of crisis, dinging talking points from the groups that seek to oppress/hunt them, like it was bingo.
Thank you.