this post was submitted on 18 Mar 2024
360 points (96.9% liked)

News

23305 readers
3684 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. 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.

founded 1 year 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.

(page 2) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 10 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months 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] 13 points 7 months ago (8 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] -5 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months 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 7 months ago (2 children)

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

[–] [email protected] 7 points 7 months 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] 6 points 7 months 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 7 months ago (4 children)
[–] [email protected] 3 points 7 months 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)
[–] [email protected] 0 points 7 months ago

I agree, throw the toddlers in the fire.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 7 months ago (1 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?

[–] [email protected] -4 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Totes what I said, mate, totes. A+

But yeah get rid of the guns.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (4 children)

That would be nice. But right now we are trying to discuss something more realistic, something that could be done now. What do you believe could honestly be done NOW? Mandatory education about firearms or a total ban?

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 7 points 7 months ago (3 children)

Abstinence only gun safety

[–] [email protected] 1 points 7 months ago

Exactly....i was looking for a clever way to say that

[–] [email protected] 3 points 7 months ago

That drives me crazy too. You can look at the numbers, and see that abstinence only simply doesn't work, that kids in abstinence-only schools have sex earlier, have riskier sexual habits, are more likely to catch and spread STIs, and have higher rates of teen pregnancy. From a simple harm reduction standpoint, you'd think people would say, wow, we can actually achieve what we say our goals are by giving kids accurate advice.

I don't get why people want to treat issues like this instead of being pragmatic and looking at the outcomes.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 7 months ago

Just don't let them know guns exist till they are 18, duh.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] [email protected] 9 points 7 months 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] 4 points 7 months ago (4 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] 2 points 7 months 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 (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 0 points 7 months ago

The same people who got rid of Satan and WOKENESS from schools.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 7 months ago (9 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.

load more comments (9 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
[–] [email protected] -2 points 7 months 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] 0 points 7 months ago (5 children)
load more comments (5 replies)
[–] [email protected] 0 points 7 months ago

I think more guns, and easier access to them would solve the problem...

[–] [email protected] -3 points 7 months ago

"unintentional"

[–] [email protected] 19 points 7 months 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] 2 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months 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] 2 points 7 months ago (1 children)

The problem here is they include 15+ year olds all the way to 19 in these stats. Which 15-19 year olds are like 80% of all gang violence. So no safe storage laws are going to stop this type of violence. It's just bullshit propaganda stats from everytown.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (2 children)

That's a normal tactic but in this case I went to the data source, Everytown, and reviewed it myself. The highest age included in their data set was 17 and there was a depressing number of children under 8 in there.

The other thing is that this data was specifically about unintentional shootings, meaning that this wasn't gang violence.

It's basically what's on the tin. Negligent and Accidental Discharges. Something that Safe Storage can help to address, especially with the younger kids.

Incidents like this.

And this.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 7 months ago

While some of these are true, a large portion of these are gang related. They're carrying without holsters in their pockets. It's happens a lot and usually isn't reported unless someone is injured. I totally agree firearms should be stored in safes but the data here is more about negligent gang members usually.

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

The highest number was 17 because at 18 you're an adult.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 7 months ago

That hasn't stopped other studies from defining "kids" as people all the way up to age 21.

It's a common tactic used to create scary headlines and twist the discourse.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 7 months 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 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months 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] -3 points 7 months 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 7 months 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] 11 points 7 months ago

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

[–] [email protected] 77 points 7 months ago (3 children)

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

[–] [email protected] 7 points 7 months ago

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

I'll see myself out

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 16 points 7 months ago

We need more good kids with guns! /s

load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›