this post was submitted on 06 Sep 2024
299 points (97.8% liked)

politics

19104 readers
1775 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
[–] Mog_fanatic@lemmy.world 18 points 2 months ago (3 children)

The Ohio senator was asked by a journalist what can be done to stop school shootings. He said further restricting access to guns, as many Democrats advocate, won’t end them, noting they happen in states with both lax and strict gun laws. He touted efforts in Congress to give schools more money for security.

I always find this weird because it just completely glosses over the possibilities of A) the restrictions not really doing anything/enough, B) the incredible ease by which someone can just... Go to another state, and C) how absurdly easy it is to purchase firearms in the secondary market.

[–] rayyy@lemmy.world 8 points 2 months ago

they happen in states with both lax and strict gun laws.

Can he back that up with a reputable source?
Seems he is full of weird shit.

[–] TonyOstrich@lemmy.world 6 points 2 months ago

His argument isn't even a valid/honest one. Take Illinois and Chicago specifically. They have stricter gun laws, but when a gun store in Indiana is just a 20-30 minute drive away those restrictions don't do much because of how close by a place with lax laws is.

[–] Nightwingdragon@lemmy.world 2 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Well, he has mastered the Trumpian art of finding a way to be wrong even when he isn't wrong.

He's right in that more anti-gun laws that are largely toothless and/or performative won't do jack shit. Of course, the reason for that is that the genie was out of the bottle decades ago. There are just simply too many guns out on the streets already for any kind of anti-gun law to be even remotely effective. If the first two steps of the process aren't "Reduce the amount of guns currently out on the streets" and "Prevent new guns from made available to the public", then everything else you try to do will be nothing more than a complete waste of time.

Notice how all the laws that have been passed to combat school shootings with AR-15s have done exactly nothing to stop school shooters with AR-15s. There's a reason for that.

[–] rayyy@lemmy.world 2 points 2 months ago (1 children)

He’s right in that more anti-gun laws that are largely toothless and/or performative won’t do jack shit.

Source that is reputable?

[–] Nightwingdragon@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago

gestures broadly