this post was submitted on 15 Jul 2024
684 points (97.6% liked)

politics

19120 readers
2215 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 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Treczoks@lemmy.world 31 points 4 months ago (2 children)

First: As conservatives love bible quotes: Hosea 8,7: "They sow the wind and reap the whirlwind." Boy, did Trump sow wind everywhere. And Thomas Crooks simply was the whirlwind this time.

Second: Each and every year, about 50,000 people in the US die from guns, and politics f-ing does not care. Because they love the money from arms manufaturers and votes from the gun nuts more than the mostly innocent people who die. But once the wrong asshole gets his ear nicked by a bullet, they suddenly fall over themselves condemning violence.

[–] JoeBigelow@lemmy.ca 1 points 4 months ago

I prefer to quote the profit Weir, in Estimations:7, quote "If you plant ice, you're gonna harvest wind"

[–] HelixDab2@lemm.ee -3 points 4 months ago (2 children)

You're intentionally conflating suicides--which account for about 2/3 of gunshot deaths annually--and the violence that Trump has repeatedly called for. Both are concerning, but they're not the same, and should not be considered as such. "Simply" banning the tools of suicide does nothing to reduce the misery.

[–] Olgratin_Magmatoe@lemmy.world 7 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (2 children)

But gun prevalence increases suicide rates. People who would otherwise not commit suicide end up doing so because a quick and relatively easy way out is available. Should those guns not be so easily accessible, some percentage of those suicides wouldn't happen.

Those gun deaths are a problem regardless of whether they're suicide or homicide. And the gun lobby/Trump is perfectly happy with all that death as long as they get their sales/status quo/money. The deaths don't need to be the same for it to be relevant.

[–] HelixDab2@lemm.ee 2 points 4 months ago (2 children)

Different root cause, different way to correct the problem. Removing the tools doesn't solve the underlying problem. Perhaps the suicides don't happen; but that doesn't reduce the misery that leads to someone killing themselves.

And, again, this is wildly different from the violence that Trump supporters are being called to.

[–] Olgratin_Magmatoe@lemmy.world 0 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

Removing the tools doesn’t solve the underlying problem. Perhaps the suicides don’t happen; but that doesn’t reduce the misery that leads to someone killing themselves.

Often times it leads to better outcomes though, which in the end solves the underlying problem. When people don't have an easy out and stick around long enough, usually the underlying problems get solved.

And, again, this is wildly different from the violence that Trump supporters are being called to.

Cool. I know. But it is irrelevant. Gun deaths are still gun deaths, and they should be prevented.

[–] HelixDab2@lemm.ee 1 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

usually the underlying problems get solved.

That was not my experience. My experience is that I was hung out to dry and left to figure shit out on my own. I got hospitalized, released three days later, and then had two years of absolute hell. Most of the people I've known that were involuntarily held had much the same experience; as soon as the immediate crisis has passed, there's no support.

But sure, tell me what it's like being suicidal and how it's so much better for everyone around me that I'm still here.

EDIT: I'll keep my guns, thanks. Going out to shoot and compete is one of the few things that I have in my life that I really enjoy.

[–] Olgratin_Magmatoe@lemmy.world -1 points 4 months ago

But sure, tell me what it’s like being suicidal

Nah, if you're gonna be antagonistic and gatekeepy like this, I'm not inclined to share my own experiences. You'll just find some reason to invalidate my own experiences and feelings. So I'm not gonna bother.

EDIT: I’ll keep my guns, thanks. Going out to shoot and compete is one of the few things that I have in my life that I really enjoy.

And in doing so you have significantly increased your chances of suicide.

[–] r3d0c@lemmy.dbzer0.com -4 points 4 months ago

Weird how it works in literally every country in the world, keep lying to yourselves though

[–] Maeve@sh.itjust.works -2 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Hangings, knives, carbon monoxide, jumping ... The means are still there.

[–] Olgratin_Magmatoe@lemmy.world 1 points 4 months ago

Yes. But none of those are as easy. Hanging is a long slow death if you fuck it up. Knives are pretty slow too and require pain as you go. Carbon monoxide poisoning requires a car. Jumping requires guts. A gun is a nice easy button to end it. Few things can compare with how easy that is.

Regardless of how you want to rationalize it, the statistics show that I'm correct. Simply having a gun in the house increases your chances of suicide.

https://med.stanford.edu/news/all-news/2020/06/handgun-ownership-associated-with-much-higher-suicide-risk.html

[–] Maeve@sh.itjust.works 1 points 4 months ago

I wonder how many of your downvoters upvoted suicide nets without a thought toward improved working conditions and wages?