• AllonzeeLV@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      71
      arrow-down
      11
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Nah, this blood, as with almost all mass shootings, is completely on the 2A people as far as I’m concerned.

      Australia cleaned up their act in response to mass tragedy. Our society just isn’t a society.

      That would require some degree of cooperation and sacrifice. Modern Americans just don’t have those qualities in us.

      This is what our people have chosen to be.

      • jordanlund@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        12
        ·
        1 year ago

        We can’t do what Australia did. 2nd Amendment aside (and that alone is a huge blocker), we have a much larger population and a much larger inventory.

        Australia confiscated 650,000 guns on a population at the time of around 18 million people. Even that was only 20% of the guns in the country.

        https://www.vox.com/2015/8/27/9212725/australia-buyback

        The United States has a population over 330 million with over 400 million guns.

        20% of 400 million would be 80 million guns. To take those off the street, we would have to run the equivalent of the Australian program 123 times.

        Logistically, it’s impossible. Even without the 2nd amendment we don’t have the capacity to do it. There’s no way to collect and dispose of them.

        • Lobotomie@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          14
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Who says this has to be done in a day? Have gun drop off places which keeps lists, destroy the guns (weld the muzzle or drill in a hole both can be done in 2minutes for a single gun) and then sell them to scrapyards. People have time until the end of 2024.

          • jordanlund@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            8
            ·
            1 year ago

            The Australian plan did take a year, October 1996 to September 1997, and all they got was 650,000 guns which was 20%.

            Americans first, have no obligation to give up their guns thanks to the 2nd Amendment and second, aren’t as likely to give up their guns.

            You aren’t getting 80 million (20%) even in a year, and again, we don’t have the capacity to collect and dispose of them.

            80 million / 50 (yeah, I know, it won’t be an even distribution, but let’s work the math roughly) 1.6 million per state / 12 months = 133,333 a month per state.

            The Australian plan took 12 months to collect 650,000. So the US would need to meet that in about 5 states in one month.

            The most successful gun buyback in US history collected 4,200 guns across 4 buybacks.

            https://www.hcp1.net/GunBuyback

            The Australian plan cannot work here.

            • User_4272894@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              10
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              I mean, you’re throwing out a lot of numbers claiming it is impossible, but we have logistics and resources that Australia didn’t in 1996. If Amazon can deliver 7.7 billion packages a year, and the US can count 150 million votes in a week during election season, we can figure out how to break down 400 million guns over a month, a year, or a decade. It doesn’t have to happen overnight. The “Australian plan” doesn’t have to work here, but getting guns off the street somehow does.

              • jordanlund@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                7
                ·
                1 year ago

                I guarantee you don’t want a private company like Amazon handling gun confiscation, public policy should not be up to private companies to enforce. Might as well ask people to drop off their guns at the local WalMart and ask untrained staff to deal with them. No good will come from it.

                Elections are a different deal because all you’re processing is bits of paper and data, you aren’t running the risk of, you know, explosive ordinance.

                Even if we had the logistics, which we don’t, there’s still the 2nd amendment to contend with. We can’t force people to give up their guns, that’s a right the Australians didn’t have.

                Repealing the 2nd Amendment can be done, but it starts with 290 votes in the House. You did watch the struggle it took to get the 217 they needed to elect their own leader, right?

                • User_4272894@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  9
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  I didn’t suggest Amazon run the process. I just meant “logistics infrastructure exists on a scale unimaginable in 1996”. 600 million COVID doses given out in the US might have been a better comparison. Or 7.2 billion packages by USPS in 2022. There are 708k cops in the US. That’s 2 guns recovered per cop per month to have it done in 90 days.

                  There is literally no argument in the world where “the logistics make it impossible” is a reasonable claim.

                  Likewise, “we’ll never get 290 votes” is a lazy and cowardly claim. Yes, it’ll be hard. Yes, it’ll be a fight. Yes, we’ll have some minds that will be impossible to change. But your apparent argument in defense of gun rights seems to be “aww, jeez, it seems pretty tricky” which is truly mind boggling to me.

        • blackn1ght@feddit.uk
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          12
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          You guys put people on the moon in the 60s. You sure as hell can sort this out with enough will power and time. But instead all you offer are excuses.

          • jordanlund@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            We haven’t been to the moon since 1972 and don’t even have our own shuttle program anymore. Our bridges and roads are falling apart, we have absolutely no plan for climate change, and this ass-hat is speaker of the House of Representatives:

            https://www.cbsnews.com/news/speaker-mike-johnson-legislation-house-agenda/

            But here’s the crux of the problem that folks outside the US don’t get:

            The right to own a gun is guaranteed in our founding document. It doesn’t matter if you agree it should be or not, it’s there and it’s been upheld by the Supreme Court multiple times.

            We could amend the Constitution again… but doing so starts in the House and takes 290 votes.

            They took 22 days to get a simple 217 vote majority to decide who their own Speaker would be, there’s no WAY they get 290 votes on removing the 2nd Amendment.

            But let’s say some miracle happens and we get 290, now it goes to the Senate where we need 67 votes. Same problem, the Senate is incapacitated by a minority who require 60 votes to do ANYTHING and that hasn’t been attainable.

            But lets say some billionaire swoops in and pays off enough people to get 67…

            Now it goes to the states for ratification and we need 38 states for it to become an amendment.

            Look at 2020 as a guide - Biden won 25 states + Washington D.C., Trump won 25 states.

            You would need all 25 Biden states to ratify + 13 Trump states. For every Biden state you lose, you need +1 Trump state.

            Take a look at the Trump states and count up 13 willing to give up their gun rights…

        • Woht24@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          I’m actually mostly on your side, I think the US is too far gone. If you took peoples guns off them in the US, I genuinely think there would be a or several small civil wars.

          Further a lot of people would just refuse, hide their guns etc.

          If the US actually tried to do what Australia did I think you’d actually see a drop in shootings etc but it would take 50-70 years to actually get through the majority of weapons ‘on the street’.

          But to say it’s logistically impossible is absolutely and completely wrong. It’s culturally near impossible.

          P.s. I’m Australian and our shooting crimes are going up, pistol numbers are going up too and we have the worst self defence laws. I wish I could have a loaded Glock and the right to shoot an intruder in my home honestly.

      • Garbanzo@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        26
        ·
        1 year ago

        Our society just isn’t a society.

        Which is why I’d prefer to have a gun

    • Dkarma@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Don’t forget the day before he killed people that this was “a good guy with a gun”

    • jennwiththesea@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      They need a red flag/extreme risk protection order (ERPO) law in their state, at the very least. If used, such a law could have prevented this. It’s one of the things that Moms Demand Action has been pushing for.

      • crashoverride@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        As soon as someone comes in with HI/SI that should trigger a response that removes all weapons from someone’s home, a 72 hr psych hold, and informs all immediate friends/family that they are not to be allowed near guns/knives. Period

  • PorradaVFR@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    101
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Of course he could have done that step first but instead another damaged and armed asshole imposes his demons on others and inflicts grievous pain on dozens of families before offing themself.

    Yet another in a long list of isolated incidents because after trying nothing we’ve run out of ideas.

    • Lev_Astov@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      It’s not like we’ve tried nothing; he should have been dealt with when he made threats, but the police don’t want to act on the laws we have in place. They want to wait until a tragedy happens so they can feel like they’re being heroes, apparently.

      • tigeruppercut@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        14
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        police don’t want more stringent gun laws because tons of them beat their wives and they’d be disqualified from carrying guns

        • nilloc@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          I suspect they’re also worried we’d take away all their fun toys if the threat of constant gun violence wasn’t there.

  • Maeve@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    62
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    1 year ago

    The mass shooting was the 565th in the U.S. in 2023 and the deadliest so far this year, according to the Gun Violence Archive.

  • bmsok@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    55
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    The US has both a gun problem AND a mental health problem. We need more immediate access to long term healthcare.

    The addition of the 988 hotline is an ok start but mental health issues are still demonized and have limited resources.

    Tragic underfunding + stigma = tragedies

    Everyone check in on your friends and loved ones, too.

    • jordanlund@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      24
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      We need universal mental health care full stop. Even if you’re against universal health care in general, and I don’t know why anyone would be, start with universal mental health care.

      Get people assessed, get them the treatment they need. If they need to be held the rest of their lives, figure out how to make that work safely and humanely.

    • crashoverride@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      18
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      But let’s be clear here, this guy did not do these things because he had a mental health problem. Dude had a plan, a really complex one, and had extensive training in the army to carry a plan out like this , to avoid being captured and to cause as much damage as possible. If he was just suicidal, he would have just offed himself instead of 22 plus other casualties he caused. Do not blame on what he did on his mental health problem and failure to get it sorted

      I blame it on society as a whole, the failure to take away his guns whenever he checked into a mental health place, and for failure to take care of his veterans.

        • crashoverride@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Had problems with an ex, some old friends, and it looks like he was fired recently from a job. Wanted revenge I guess.

          • bmsok@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            I mean, that’s sort of exactly why everyone needs someone to talk to and process stuff. If you’ve lost a relationship, friends, and a job you should be able to access care when you start having dark thoughts like this.

            • crashoverride@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              Exactly, small things that build up can lead to tragedy. Especially when you’re mentally unstable to begin with. What happened with him was horrible and tragic, but not totally his fault. Society has some blame to take too because they let him out of that facility without a support system in place and they didn’t take his guns. Two things they should have done. In addition to help and support we also need trigger laws that take all your guns and other weapons, and inform your family and friends that this person is not allowed to have guns, and closely monitor his financials to see if he’s trying to buy a gun. Any ONE of those would have prevented what happened in Lewiston.

    • nutsack@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      the hotline is a copout to help people ignore the systemic problems fueling depression epidemic

      • bmsok@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        Oh the whole thing is definitely a broader socioeconomic and societal issue, for sure. That’s why it’s a crisis line and not a therapy line.

  • eran_morad@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    53
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    1 year ago

    Let’s be real. The only way this stops is when enough republicunt politicians see their own children murdered in such incidents.

    • ArugulaZ@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      Clearly because they put more value in their lives than those of others. What do these freaks call other people? Non-player characters? They don’t matter, because they’re not themselves. Narcissism to the extreme.

    • andrew_bidlaw@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      They hate. They feel antogonistic towards this society. They blame every their failure on it. They want to hurt it, the cosmos of things they hate, to make it burn, to make it suffer.

      Offing themselves isn’t the goal, but they’d feel weak if they’d just surrender to it. Instead they choose fucking with their pain, with a collective of those they blame for it, while leaving this hydra helpless to presecute them. If they are to quit, what else matters?

      In gunning down random people they feel relief, the reclamation of power over their shitty life for once. They don’t see people, just parts of thing hurting them, hated by them. They feel like there exists only two actors: they vs the world. And inflicting damage on the world is answering to whatever this world did to them.

      One can’t rationalize this purely irrational reaction.

    • Maeve@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      I’d venture because that’s their general disposition, anyway. Jeanne d’Arc heard voices too, never took a human life.

      • BottleOfAlkahest@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I agree with you that people hearing voices does not necessarily mean they are violent or dangerous. The majority of people who hear voices have never and will never hurt anyone.

        Jehanne d’Arc technically never took a human life directly…but she’s famous for being a rallying symbol of France and strategic wartime leader. That doesn’t exactly make her hands clean even if she never technically killed anyone. Shes also reported as having had a pretty vicious temper that lead to her doing things like chasing prostitutes with a sword which isn’t exactly the epitome of peaceful and undangerous.

  • banneryear1868@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    23
    ·
    1 year ago

    Time for the usual political debate to run it’s course and nothing to happen, because any change to the conditions that generate this violence run against capital interests.

  • Rapidcreek@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    20
    ·
    1 year ago

    Multiple law enforcement sources told ABC News that Robert Card died of a self-inflicted gunshot wound. Sources told CNN that he was found dead in the woods near the town of Lisbon.

    Better that than taking further life.

    • roguetrick@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      24
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      So he didn’t want to get brains all over HIS house, but was happy with killing a bunch of other people. What a shithead.

  • ArugulaZ@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    17
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    His whole family was of a similar mindset; better put a laser focus on their activities, because you know they’ll be next.

    • Nougat@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      16
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Nothing suggests that his motivations edit: for the spree killing were in any way political.

      • aegisgfx877@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        15
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        “Robert Card’s social media sites showed support for Trump, among other politicians. As shown by the video, Card liked tweets from high-profile conservative figures such as Donald Trump Jr., Tucker Carlson, Dinesh D’Souza. He also engaged with publications from former house speakers Kevin McCarthy and Jim Jordan, as per the video.”

        • Nougat@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          13
          ·
          1 year ago

          He had clear mental health issues. He recently lost a girlfriend and a job. He shot up two locations where he and that girlfriend had spent time. His body was found next to the recycling center he’d been fired from.

          He was also a right-wing militia nut job, but nothing about this spree killing suggests that his motivations for it were political.

          • meco03211@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            14
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            But it does support the notion that the severely mentally ill or those prone to the sorts of delusions that lead to mass murder are drawn to right wing extremist ideologies. It’s why a staggeringly lopsided proportion of terrorist attacks and mass killing acts are perpetrated by the right wing extremists.

            • Nougat@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              I don’t disagree with that one bit. Socially acceptable delusions are very attractive for people who are already prone to delusions in general, and make the notion of believing other things without evidence easier.