this post was submitted on 29 Oct 2025
378 points (98.5% liked)

politics

26226 readers
2245 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. 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:

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. 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.
  5. 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

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Since Trump's election, gun groups catering to progressives and people of color report a surge in interest as they look to defend themselves in a country that, to them, feels increasingly unstable.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] SCmSTR@lemmy.blahaj.zone -1 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Finally.

Okay, so, statistically, gun deaths in the US are strongly correlated to a distinct increase in premature death in kids.

And that statistic makes owning assault rifles wrong, because, if you remove the rifles from the populace, those deaths would go away. Yeah?

I'm so for those deaths no longer happening, but I also like having an armed population to fight off, at this point, fascism, if it ever comes to that. Is there another way, where we can have our guns and our children, too?

Is there correlation that having an armed population with assault rifles always causes school shootings? Is there evidence of it not? Switzerland seems good. Really good gun control for a militia system. I'd be really happy with moving to that. Though, I think the issue Americans would take is that it's a government militia system and we're supposed to defend against our own government.

But, why? Oh god... Don't tell me this is further southern bullshit "states rights" stuff. I mean, at this point, yeah, we literally have a fascist occupation and right now is not the time to disarm.

But maybe that's the reason. The long-standing conflict between North and South in the USA may be THE reason nobody trusts the government and everybody wants to be armed; there's a low key cold war going on between the north and south that has never been resolved, and a side effect is that when the population is deeply stressed and unhappy, shit like school shootings happen.

The guns are a sign of non-unity.

So, fix the conflict, the guns may go away on their own over time.

But asking people to disarm is like getting the world to de-nuke. And asking people to do it during conflict is.... Well, good luck. Because even if the guns don't provide protection in all instances, it definitely helps people feel more powerful. Though, in my experience it seems to have a calming effect since the people I've known don't want to kill somebody, so they deescalate or leave a situation. I'm going to assume that's the norm, but it doesn't change the statistical fact that school shootings are prevalent.

The issue with removing the ARs from the equation is, multifaceted, obviously. It's a right that you don't get back, good luck getting everybody to disarm, compensation, it's really engrained in culture for a lot of people and you have to convince them to basically change huge aspects of their lives, their hobbies, their heritage, their values, and worldview.

Do you see any of this differently?

[–] masterspace@lemmy.ca 2 points 2 days ago

Yes, I see it differently. Notice how literally every single other country in the entire world doesn't do what the US does?