Look, everyone! A rational response!
What? You were expecting thoughts and prayers?
this post was submitted on 18 Jun 2025
302 points (99.0% liked)
World News
48361 readers
1594 users here now
A community for discussing events around the World
Rules:
-
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
-
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
-
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
-
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
-
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
-
Rule 5: Keep it civil. 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.
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.
-
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
-
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
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.
Lemmy World Partners
News !news@lemmy.world
Politics !politics@lemmy.world
World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world
Recommendations
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
- Consider including the article’s mediabiasfactcheck.com/ link
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Wait what? Rapid policy change in response to gun violence?
Good job ~~Australia~~ Austria!
Austria lol. Mozart, not kangaroos.
Schwarzenegger, not Satan.
Eurodeedoos not Dollaridoos.
Bierpartei, not Raygun
Beethoven being born in Germany and Hitler being born in Austria was one of those trivia facts I learned as a 12 year old — or thereabouts; I forget how old I was — that made me question everything. I was obviously, by definition, uneducated at that age but I had just sort of lumped “classical music=Vienna” and “Hitler=Germany.”
It’s obviously an odd fact to blow a kid’s mind and there were many more such moments to come but, for some reason, that factoid was a very effective one on my journey to realizing I didn’t know shit. (A journey I’m still on, even on things I have a degree in or worked on. Nothing teaches you how much you don’t know like learning enough to realize you haven’t even scratched the surface.)
Technically speaking Beethoven was born in Austria. Austrian Netherlands that is (current day Belgium), owned by the Habsburgs.
Or even more generally, he was born in the Holy Roman Empire of Germanic Nations (today Switzerland, Belgium, Netherlands, Luxembourg, parts of France, parts of Poland, Austria, Czechia, Germany) and died in the Austrian Empire.
Whoops, thanks!
Australia also had a pretty strong reaction when it happened there.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Port_Arthur_massacre_(Australia)
America currently going: “la la la la la” while turning its back to the problem.
Austria? well then, gday mate! let's put another shrimp on the barbie!
~~It was Austria. Autocorrect?~~
Sorry, other replies didn't load initially.
I'll toss this on the mountain of proactive things other countries are doing that the U.S. isn't.
The main issue I have with laws like these is... once the person who "needed to cool off" has the gun all they need is to get hot-headed again and this time there isn't a cool-off period for them to access it.
The psychology "test" is all fine and good, but a test doesn't tell you what an actual licensed psychologist can. Way too easy for someone to just lie on a test if they know what the "right" answers are. A lot more difficult to hide dangerous personality traits in front of another human being. Step it up one more notch to requiring a psychological evaluation.
Would any psychologist risk their entire career and criminal liability to grant anyone a pass to obtain a firearms license? For what is ultimately a hobby?
I think an evaluation is just unreasonable considering how overworked mental health professionals are. I would genuinely hate it if someone who wants to get better and work out some issues can't because there is better money in talking to the gun nuts.
Nah. I am a firm believer in chains of liability. Kid shoots up a school? Whose gun was that? Dad? Dad is now liable for a pretty major charge. Oh? He didn't keep it locked up in a safe? Who sold Dad that gun? Herman? He better have ALL his paperwork in order and he better have followed every single required step to make sure Dad knows how to store a gun properly and has a gun safe and so forth. He didn't? What distributor did he buy that gun from? And so forth.
Obviously US biased, but we put more effort into making sure someone buying a car has insurance than we do making sure someone buying a gun even understands why keeping "one in the chamber" is one of the dumbest things you can do.
So pass that on. Because if that guy who wants a people killer gives bad vibes? That isn't just your license mister gun store man, that is potentially your freedom if he goes after the woman who turned him down for coffee. And if you are a gun company and you sell to sketchy stores that "lose shipments" all the time? You might not be a company the first time a serial number is run. Suddenly EVERYONE starts caring about actually doing due diligence.
And obviously that model is incredibly prone to racism and bias. But that also matters a lot less if the guy who will sell a gun to any white man with a swastika on his neck goes to prison after the first murder.
The issue I can see with that model is that, depending on how exactly it is implemented, it might end up spilling into places that involve people who were doing nothing unreasonable. For example, suppose a criminal makes a pipe gun, or a 3-d printed one, and uses that in a crime. If we're always looking down the chain, do we also hold responsible whoever sold them the pipes, or the printer, or other machining tools? The easy enough answer is to except steps that don't usually have to do with firearms I suppose (where the people involved would not generally have reason to expect the purchaser is using what they buy for those purposes), but in taking that obvious step, one would create a situation where acquiring guns through less traceable and safe means becomes easier than the ways that can be tracked, which is rarely a good thing if you want rules to actually be followed.
Personally, I think that, rather than the guns themselves, the focus of gun control measures should be on the ammunition they fire. It doesn't last as long as a gun potentially can, and is disposable, meaning that the large number of guns already in circulation poses less of an issue, and is harder to manufacture at home due to the requirement for explosive chemicals. Further, most "legitimate" civilian uses for a gun either don't require all that much of it (like hunting), or can be done in a centralized location that can monitor use (like sport target shooting at a professionally run shooting range).
What I would do, is put a very restrictive limit on how much ammunition a given person may purchase in a given year, and only allow exceptions to that limit if the person can provide proof that an equivalent amount of their existing allotment has been fired, returns old ammunition for exchange, or purchases the extra at a licensed range that as a condition of the license must monitor patrons and ensure those bullets are either fired or refunded before the shooter leaves.
3d printed guns/ghost guns are a whole different mess that can be trivially solved by controlling the barrels. People underestimate how much material science goes into making a gun barrel and can just look at any documentation on The Troubles for how often pipe guns exploded in the hands of those who use it.
Also, people don't like it but that can also be more or less trivially solved through simple (basically computer vision but) AI/ML that can detect if you are printing a glock or if that cavity is the perfect size for an AR-15 fire control group. And companies like Bambu are already doing everything they can to lock down slicers to proprietary software that will make this easy.
but in taking that obvious step, one would create a situation where acquiring guns through less traceable and safe means becomes easier than the ways that can be tracked, which is rarely a good thing if you want rules to actually be followed.
Which sounds like a good thing to me. I would much rather people have to have technical know how (because printing that STL you bought on the fun site is not as easy as you would expect. Old Vice had a great video on this) rather than just buying a gun at walmart or one of the many "untraceable" guns that "fell off the back of a truck" on their way to said walmart.
I am also a fan of controlling ammunition (buy as much as you can shoot at the range but you need to keep it there) but it really doesn't take much ammo to wipe out a kindergarten class.
The "Test" will probably be in line with a psych eval like we already have for our military, which will be enough for cases like this, because he was unfit to serve.
he was still able to get a gun licence, because in austria you are only blocked from getting a gun licence (for 15 years IIRC) if you refuse to serve in the military on ethical grounds and do civil service instead, and the data from the military evaluation is kept secret because of privacy laws.
I mean I guess it's a better system then just being able to walk into a random store and just buy a gun. In my country we have a pretty strict gun control you need have not committed any crimes and be able to get a document from the government saying so, you'll also need the following;
- be part of a gun club, which itself has a cool down period of several months and they can refuse you for whatever reason they see fit
- have a minimum amount of shooting days per year
- have to participate in the yearly contest for one of the different disciplines possible at the club
- have to be a continuous member of previously mentioned club at least one year before you can even apply for your first licence
- your first licence can only be in a single .22 weapon, this weapons will be registered to you as a person and your place of residence
- your gun and ammo needs to be in separate safe's, also the gun may not be stored in a loaded state
- after you have the weapon you will be checked at random and you need to be able to show the weapon at the visiting police officer immediately, or if you cannot show it at the local police station within a few days after the visit. if they visit they will check if your safe('s) are properly mounted to wall/floor
- have to extend your licence yearly
- if you fail the checks or violate any laws you will lose your license and you will need to either store your weapon(s) at a registered location or sell them, evidence of both will need to be shared with the police. you can apply for a new licence after one year of probation
- the maximum amount of weapons you can have registered at any time is 5
Firearms are either considered a part of sport (hence the clubs) of for hunting which has their own subset of rules. You can never have any full automatic firearms, those are considered for military use only.
"serious psychology test"
Until someone from a different political party comes in and turns it into a "political party loyalty test"
Soooo, we then just go back to handing guns to anyone?
Sorry, but with that attitude we can't improve anything. How about we just keep it a psychology test?
That would take a majority vote, not only a single party change. Our system here in austria isn't perfect (like most of the world), but it is not the broken mess the US have.
Regardless, i'd say the move to stronger regulation is welcome here. The shooter had his guns legally, even tho he was deemed unfit for military service, which screams "regulatory hole to fix ASAP"
looks like there is broad support for making sure that whoever wants a gun to be stable enough to handle them without shooting up a school.
Oh, Austria!!
I always confuse Austria with Baluchistan!
The thing is, this is mostly reactionary politics. They do this because it's easy and they can say "see we did something, gib vote".
Instead phsychological care is being reduced, which would be way more valuable in the long term.
I am not saying gun laws are bad, just that they don't pose that much of a problem in Austria if it weren't for psychological issues. Not to speak about alcohol, unrelated to the shooting but ffs thats an issue nobody touches because "culture"-_-. I just mention this because regulating this properly and/or providing psychogical care for alcohol problems, or even aknowledging that it IS a problem, would go way further in preventing harm and accidents.
Not as interesting of an issue of course, no outrageous headlines to be made that don't negatively impact politicians..
Cars are much safer than they used to be, so why get trucks and SUV instead as these are exempt from a number of car safety requirements (like crumple zones) in the US. They have a likelihood of causing fatal unjuries when they collide with other cars and pedestrians that is 8 times higher than the average sedan, according to a UK study. Due to their size, weight and bad visibility for obstacles close by, they are also much more likely to crash into stuff.
I mean, I would love North America as a whole not need to rely on cars as much as we do now. This involves building walkable neighborhoods and investment in public transit. But the car lobby is not going to let that happen. Same with the gun lobby in the US.
It can be done. Europe as a whole was on its way to become as car centric as the US back in the 1960's. People seriously revolted against that, most strongly in the Netherlands which is why it has such nice bike infrastructure.
We got gun laws because after WW2 Europe was full of guns, they were everywhere and it was untenable. So we got our shit together and did something about it.
That's good information. It does sound like the backlash happened before large scale car friendly infrastructure got too ingrained. That's likely an easier pivot earlier on. And curious if guns were as fetishized culturally as it is in the US?
I still think industry financial interests are still the biggest roadblock to any meaningful change. In the US especially, where profit comes before well being, almost all of the time.
I bet the kid was American /s
I'm glad to see a country do more than ask pointlessly, "what else can we do?"
Isn't Austria's military service age lower than 21?
They can just join military and access guns there
No the guns weren't as fetishized. On the other hand in the first half of the 20th century large bits of Europe had been occupied by the Germans twice. The idea that you wanted to be armed in case of a foreign invasion happening was a lot stronger, and more well founded, than the wettest dream of a 2nd amendement lover. Lots of people had been in the armed resistance and a lot of those who had not wished they had had the opportunity.
Not going to prevent a thing, all for show.
I live in a country with rather restrictive gun laws. That stuff works great! I never have to worry about getting shot.
I don't worry about getting shot, stabbed, or bludgeoned. Avoid gang activity and gun free zones you'll be statistically in the clear. Been around firearms my whole life, if you can't trust the people around you with a firearm maybe they don't need to be walking free.
Ah yes, Afearican's never worry, famously.
That is a socioeconomic issue. Maybe you should read up on the Mississippi Freedom Movement and its relationship with firearms and the civil rights movement that hasn't been whitewashed by white America.
For real, avoiding those areas they mentioned only does two things
-
Shows that they fear getting shot or stabbed in those areas, which is directly counter to their attestation.
-
Indicates they're probably super racist, because how do you tell what is or isn't a "gang area"?
Kids here are afraid to go to school (for good reason), and people like this refuse to consider ANY worthwhile fixes.
The data is entirely clear, gun regulations reduce gun violence. Full stop.
You're making a lot of assumptions there friend.
I'll own that