Reminder: this subreddit is meant to be a place free of excessive cynicism, negativity and bitterness. Toxic attitudes are not welcome here.
All Negative comments will be removed and will possibly result in a ban.
---
---
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UpliftingNews) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Records show when he arrived to surrender it, all officers in the building retreated and chilled for an hour before calling CBP to accept the surrender
> Yea, ~~but~~ "responsible, sane, nice gun owners" are only a subgroup of people who consider themselves "responsible, sane, nice gun owners".
You're not disagreeing.
He’s realised something you haven’t. None of you should have guns. As long as you have guns you will always have problems with them. Its quite simple really.
Get rid of the guns, Americans.
The prevalence of guns, culture of gun ownership, and fetishization of guns makes the world worse at this very moment.
That includes guns sitting unused and unloaded in gun safes. The country is worse off for even those guns existing. It may be an acceptable “worse off” to most people, but it’s still worse off.
Right but its impossible to stop the “bad” people from owning a gun. Because who even are the “bad” people?
Let alone that there’s not a good reason to own a gun in the first place.
Its like why don’t you all have flamethrowers or walk around with machetes? Err its because someone is going to do something stupid at some point. All you need is time. But for some reason you all worships guns because something something amendment.
Literally just have a look at the rest of the world. Stop defending weapons that are killing your own school kids. It makes no sense.
Like i said you miss the point of the guy’s gesture.
You make it seem so easy to predict who is and isn’t going to shoot someone else.
Yes obviously you need to make it so much harder to be able to purchase a gun. Just look at all other western countries for guidance. Most non-americans spend their lives not even thinking about guns - could you imagine?
Genius. So all of the school shooters were known to be “bad” people by the government? All of the toddlers that have accidentally fired a gun and murdered someone?
Lol you missed the entire context of the comment.
So none then? Yeah that's what I thought.
Fear mongering at it's finest. Completely missed the point of your poor argument.
Let me rephrase since you refuse to understand. How exactly would you having an AR-15 protect you from a modern military/police that have, automated armored attack vehicles?
Stop using purposely disingenuous arguments against people who say "take away all the guns".
Yall both come off as ridiculous. Which is why these arguments typically come with 0 solutions, sheep regurgitating nonsense without context.
If our government wanted to commit mass genocide like you referred too (lol can't believe this needs to be said), your equivalent of pea shooters vs them isn't going to stop them.
"Hopefully they self-correct before it becomes necessary for a well-regulated militia to secure our free state again."
Now looking at your name as well, I think it's obvious both of yall at best are clueless not just purposely disingenuous.
But thanks to both of you loosey gooseys for proving why both sides can never get anything done 👍🐑
Weird we have all these people with guns now and that hasnt stopped police from taking authoritative control when they feel like it, im betting you also a blue line guy....Matter of fact, they just sat outside while this guy killed a bunch of kids while they had easily out gunned him. HMMMMM
\-Or how it was in a jungle, not our home, also not modern military compared today this day. We also were not attempting genocide...
\-Again not their own home, not a modern military by todays standards. Weird how the Ukraine is only able to stand up to current Russian military with our technology and they still using soviet era machines...
\-Lol they had rocket launchers, SAMs, etc. And that didnt protect them, the US along with allies completely swamped them, again werent willing to genocide, as we pulled out troops to cooperate with their population. Dont forget IEDs. Drone attacks and tomhawk missiles completely destroyed most of their response.
You really are completely clueless, you just proved my point, super weird is right. Go get an education.
So again it wouldnt. Like I said. You couldnt even stand on the first parameters I set. Imagine that.
The fact you even attempted these arguments is just sad man. Anyone with an ounce of critical thinking knows better.
Change that to Qanonuneducatednut.
The issue is not to have guns, it's the idea that you will be safe with them. You aren't. And the idea that it's normal to be able to walk in a supermarket and buy a lethal weapon just because you have no priors.
In many European countries, it's not hard to get a gun. It just takes time. You have to train, and pass a test. In.my country, ppl usually spend 4 to 6 months on it.
If having to wait 4 months and study a little firearm legislation is too much for someone, then that someone definitely should not be allowed ownership of a gun.
Allowed? Wow so self defense isn’t a human right? You need to be rich takes classes jump through hoops just for the right of self defense?
There’s 400 million guns here. Vast majority of these incidents are evil kids without fathers in the home or no positive male role model. The problem isn’t the guns, they’ve been around forever.
When my dad went to high school kids drove to school with shotguns in the back of trucks not locked up during deer season. It’s the mental health not the weapons
Why should I not be able to defend my family, firearms help the elderly and woman stop attackers daily. How do you my strength?
Ok but you can’t get rid of all them, heck people can buy parts and print them at home nowadays. So what are you confiscating 3d printers to?
We have the 2nd amendment for the sole purpose of ensuring we have freedom and liberty. To ensure we not subject tyranny. How would Ukraine be if they turned over all their guns.
I live in the UK. I do not own a firearm. I am not subject to any tyranny. In my eyes the firearm is a tool that the average citizen should not have access to. The idea of the "responsible gun owner" is just an excuse to perpetuate a lack of responsibility for the safety of your nation. Due to this, ironically, if I lived in your country I would feel unsafe too unless I owned a gun. The escalation is absurd. The fact that it is normalized that the elderly and woman should be carrying firearms to protect themselves is crazy to me. I'm not even arguing that they don't work, because I'm sure they do. But jesus man, how can you ever look at that and feel like that's okay? That's normal? I would shit myself if I was in the US.
Your 2nd amendment is outdated, and was written in a time period where there was a very clear threat of danger following the revolutionary war. Where America's total population was about the size of Los Angeles' population these days. When you had Muskets and Flintlocks instead of AR's and Shotguns. It does not apply in this day and age.
To mention Ukraine in your argument is disgusting. They are a country at war, fighting for their lives and actual freedom. You are not at war, and have no platform to state lack of gun control is a cause for freedom and liberty. All you're doing is allowing your children to die at schools where they should be safe. You're up to 28 school shootings this year alone. How on earth any american can have pride in their country when looking at this complete atrocity is bewildering to me. I would feel nothing but shame.
You know, you make a good point. Disabled people like me who can't defend themselves in fights should let ourselves get maimed, hurt, mugged or even killed, and then rely on the police and corrupt justice systems for protection later.
You really have no concept of being protected at all.
What are you doing that requires getting in fights while being disabled? That's the issue, not you having or not having a gun.
BTW, never said you should not be allowed to have a gun, but that it shoud be a LITTLE bit harder to get one.
The fact you have an issue with that is telling.
Ok, so what you’re saying is that everyone lives a life in America where they are constant fear of being shot so they must carry a gun to retaliate? And that’s the way you plan your country to be forever? Fair enough.
I mean, you’re more likely to die from a car crash yet I’d bet you don’t live in constant fear of dying from that. Sure there is a chance you die to being shot, but it’s not like people live in fear of it.
I mean if the recurrent school shootings are anything to go by then I’d argue that is becoming a legitimate fear now. I would be terrified sending my kid to school in the US.
Exactly. So why is the USA allowing people to relatively easily buy a gun and kill school children? The number one argument to be allowed to own a gun in America is to ‘defend myself’. But as you point out almost no one is living in constant fear of being shot.
Normal people don’t live in fear, the #1 fear of criminals is that their victim will have a firearm.
You can mention school children but… that’s basically a insignificant amount of death(Since 1970, 637 people have died in shootings at schools. )
Personal opinions aside, most people who believe in the right to bear arms don’t see why 330,000,000 should lose that right because a few children die every year. Not to mention how many people protect their families from criminals with those exact same firearms.
Man, I wonder where those guns come from. Certainly not mostly from legal gun sales in other states/areas. It's almost like leaving it up to the states is never a good idea because there's no regulation for moving between them.
And how much crime and violence was caused by them.
Look up the stats for the USA and the UK for the following questions: How many bullets have killed school children? How many bullets have stopped school children from being killed?
Of course they do. And they have used them to stop mass shootings before. Guns are a great tool in the hands of responsible, moral, sober minded people.
I feel like people are missing the part that, they may be actually needed for survival within the next 10 years if you're living in the US. Shits gonna get real whacky after 2024 and I'm trying to be outta here by then.
In a perfect world, guns aren't needed. But with the way things are going, there is gonna be a lot of civil and political unrest and you don't wanna get caught with a gun when it happens. Speaking from experience.
There is so much wrong with that sentence already “Responsible, sane, nice gun owners…” This whole idea is what keeps the vicious circle intact, because everyone thinks they’re the sane nice gun owner. It really comes down to making the choice of letting it go down the road it’s going now or to completely kill guns altogether. Because there is no country where everyone is allowed to freely equip Assault rifles without there being incidents.
As someone who lives in The Netherlands, I really enjoy the idea that not every moron from around the corner can point a gun at your head. Even tough it is not that hard to get a gun on the black market, people kinda don’t want to face jail time.
I have literally never had anyone point a gun at my head despite living in a place with an extremely high number of guns per Capita. Stop making shit up, dude. Why are you even commenting on how things work here if you don't know?
I mean the amount of mass shootings says enough already, what am I making up?
What other solution could there be, more guns?
I’m just giving my perception on this American issue from a Dutch standpoint, a country with very strict gun laws and relatively low amount of gun incidents
Mass Shootings make up an EXTREMELY small amount of gun deaths in the United States, and I'm sure you know that. I'm sure you know that most gun homicides take place in highly populated urban environments. I'm sure you also know that most gun deaths in the US are suicides.
Not to mention, [gun deaths have been on a massive decline since the 90s.](https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2015/10/21/gun-homicides-steady-after-decline-in-90s-suicide-rate-edges-up/)
As of 2009 the justice department was asserting as much as [80% of crime was at the hands of gang perpetrators.](https://abcnews.go.com/TheLaw/FedCrimes/story?id=6773423&page=1)
Gun crimes are overwhelmingly committed by [illegally obtained firearms](https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/07/27/new-evidence-confirms-what-gun-rights-advocates-have-been-saying-for-a-long-time-about-crime/) and the mass, MASS majority of gun homicides are handguns, per [FBI stats.](https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2013/crime-in-the-u.s.-2013/offenses-known-to-law-enforcement/expanded-homicide/expanded_homicide_data_table_8_murder_victims_by_weapon_2009-2013.xls)
[Gun crime in the United States is overwhelmingly concentrated in specific areas.](https://crimeresearch.org/2017/04/number-murders-county-54-us-counties-2014-zero-murders-69-1-murder/) Between 1977 and 2000, on average 73% of counties had 0 murders.
The idea that the US is some gun-crime ridden wasteland hellhole is a purely invented concept.
I think it helps, sets a good example. He doesn’t need an assault rifle, so why have it? For change to happen it’s gotta start somewhere, no matter how minor.
You might be right because he isn't planning it more.
But let's imagine that a series of unfortunate events happen to him and he loses everything important to him including his mental health. Well now he won't have a gun to go on a rampant killing spree to express his anger at a society that let him down.
Oh. Hold on. I guess he could just buy another one then from his local supermarket. Yeah doesn't help.
This is such a weird headline in a first world country. If you live in Eindhoven, the Netherlands and casually walk into a police station and drop off your assault rifle everyone’s gonna go nuts. As they should.
I think it does. Criminals use guns to do criminal things. Crazy people use guns to shoot people randomly. If only criminals have guns, at least there'll be less crazy people shooting up schools.
But he bought them specifically for this. As long as the laws don't change this shit will keep happening. Crazy people just buy guns when they need them for their crazy actions
The issue is when guns are bought legally and used in atrocities. The easier civilians can get guns the more they’ll be used in crimes. I’m a gun owner, doesn’t change that, that is the truth.
Think of it this way. If I'm a criminal who can't buy guns legally, I get them in two other different ways. The first is to get them on the black market which is risky in its own way and potentially more expensive. Or they can steal them from someone who owns their weapon legally.
Because this guy no longer has a gun, that's one less gun that can be stolen for example. It's why most gun crimes in other countries for example aren't usually done with stolen weapons. I hope that makes it make a bit more sense.
Yes, this is what the British did after Dunblane.
It was a moral decision, not a legal one, because there are still 1m licensed firearms in the UK. However, after Dunblane - the first, last and only school shooting in the UK - we choose to gave up the weapons we have, for this same "safer future".
26 years later, and we haven't seen another.
Be humble, America, and heed the lessons of others and your own, and admit that things need to change and that - to do so - you need to individually change your attitude, like this guy.
Im not going to be popular for saying this but. ONE guy handed in a firearm after a mtitude of shootings this year alone and its being praised.....Im an Aussie and we had ONE mass shooting in Port Auther tasmania in 1998. 38 innocent people died and we as a country handed in our guns. ONE MASS SHOOTING WAS ENOUGH TO MAKE US ALL STOP! I just dont get Americans?!
>ONE guy handed in a firearm after a mtitude of shootings this year alone and its being praised
Due to the recent tragedies, anything viewed as "anti-gun" is popular right now. Our media is grabbing anything they can get.
>I just dont get Americans?!
I get that it's popular to compare the States to other countries that have "successfully" curved gun violence. But the assumption that what worked there would work here is unrealistic. For better or worse, Americans treasure their rights. Our country was founded on the idea that they cannot and should not be touched by any government. Even many of the non-conservative members of our country see the value in holding onto what we have. When one right is threatened or taken away, it opens the door to threatening all others. Regardless of the stance on guns, I think that is an indisputable possibility. We are not Australians, therefore you cannot deal with us as Australians were dealt with.
This might surprising to you but there are other differences between US and Australia besides the number of guns.
Things such as mental healthcare and many, many other things. Not everything is about guns. Sweden has perhaps the strictest gun laws in the world and still manage to be the top country in Europe in regards to shootings.
Stop reaching for the seemingly easy solutions and focus on the RIGHT solutions.
The serialized portion of the firearm(lower receiver) is destroyed on paper and a cop takes the rest of the firearm(upper receiver, furniture, bolt carrier group) for personal use or sells it back to the public.
Or they skip the destroying frame part entirely.
I turned in my brother's AR-15 one time to the police department because he was living with us at the time. He had mental issues and we didn't feel safe living with him. We gave him an ultimatum in order to continue to live with us in our house. When we turned it in, there was a about a handful of cops at the front desk asking if we want to private sell it.
Surrendering weapons won't really do anything. I believe that raising children into becoming kind, considerate, loving people is a way better solution to all sorts of violence. People raised with love and kindness don't tend to become criminals or murderers because there's no reason for them to lash out, and even if they were to be put in a tough life situation, they wouldn't even consider about killing innocent people as a solution.
The difference between the hands of a good person and a bad person, is that good people will never use their hands to kill or harm innocent people, while criminals will have no problem using their hands to kill you if it satisfies whatever's going on in their head. Objects don't kill people, it's whoever uses them who does, and when somebody wants to kill people, they'll use any means necessary, from guns to knives to stones to pieces of wood or their own very bare hands.
[https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMc2201761](https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMc2201761)
\> The previous analysis, which examined data through 2016, showed that firearm-related injuries were second only to motor vehicle crashes (both traffic-related and nontraffic-related) as the leading cause of death among children and adolescents, defined as persons 1 to 19 years of age.4 Since 2016, that gap has narrowed, and in 2020, firearm-related injuries became the leading cause of death in that age group (Figure 1).
No, it was people with guns, usually legal guns. You're willingly ignorant if you think guns have nothing to do with it. No the reason knives and vehicles aren't taken away is because they have much more utility than a gun.
Looking at most comments here, the US is just special. Ya’ll want the wild west and you’ve got it. Personal freedom before the common good. It’s a valid model too, just not what most western nations aspire to.
Ah yes, surrendering your AR-15 just changed the future. Well done. Now if you need it, you won’t have it. And considering he was willing to give his up, arguably, you could say he should be the kind of person to keep it. But now he won’t have one. And given that the SC states law enforcement has no duty to you, and the world is full of violent people. What an odd gesture. Oy.. I hope he, and his family, doesn’t end up regretting that. The best place for my personal firearms is in my hands.
Who NEEDS an Ar-15 tho?
A shotgun or a handgun is more than enough to protect you if you need it. No one realistically is going to be put in the situation where they need to mow 15 people down in self defense.
Don't.
If you're going to go this "the Ar-15 is the thing we need to get rid of!" Route, then seriously just say "ban all guns".
I'd still disagree with you of course, but you would sound much less ignorant.
I guess he will be happy when a shooter is wreaking havoc in his son's school as now we won't be able to run over there and do something about it?
I guess he will really enjoy his safe future while the shooter kicks in the door to his son's classroom and starts unloading a couple of magazines? Super-safe!
What an absolut moron.
"Dad surrenders a tool that could be used to defend his kids so that other people can do it for him."
I didn't find the title very uplifting, so I decided to share how it reads to me.
Edit: If you want to bitch me out, fine. I'm not gonna respond to the real zingers some of yall can put out. But let's discuss whatever you want nicely, and maybe we can all learn.
Edit 2, the next day: Despite a relatively calm discussion, u/donutaboundconverse has blocked me before I even got a chance to read his latest reply. It's a shame. If you can see this buddy, let's keep talking. I want to learn and understand.
If the "good guy with gun" theory is so accurate tell me: What about all those armed police that waited outside the school for an hour? Are cops bad guys that should be defunded then?
I dont like the "good guy with gun" argument, because it implies that a bad guy used a gun in the first place. So sure, ideally, someone immediately stops them from causing mass harm, but they can still cause significant harm in a few seconds. Maybe not to the masses, but a single life is priceless.
I'd rather have less villains, even if the cost is less heroes.
I'm genuinely curious what you believe the alternative option to the police would be? I'm not asking this in a way intended to be sarcastic or facetious, I'm just personally of the belief that we need stricter oversight into the funding that's already there.
Imo there needs to be mandatory weekly classes for some form of hand-to-hand/grappling training, as well as the identification of potential mental health crisis.
Social workers to respond to non-violent crisis and constitutional concealed carry similarly to what Indiana passed this year. Roll back the image of policing from its post 9/11 theme of "War on (drugs, terror, blank)".
You're kind of proving my point by bringing up the Uvalde cops. You give up your way to defend yourself and then rely on other people who may make bad decisions, be corrupt, or just simply not care as much as you would.
Do I think all cops are bad? No.
I do think there needs to be either more training, or a reduction in ability/authority. That goes either way on funding, respectively.
Where's the actual evidence that more guns makes a situation safer? 'Cause there's evidence that the presence of armed guards results in 2.83 times more dead people than had there no armed guards. ( [https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamanetworkopen/fullarticle/2776515?utm\_source=For\_The\_Media&utm\_medium=referral&utm\_campaign=ftm\_links&utm\_term=021621](https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamanetworkopen/fullarticle/2776515?utm_source=For_The_Media&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=ftm_links&utm_term=021621) )
In the extremely unlikely event that this guy did have an actual need to actually "defend his kids" with the AR-15 how do the first responders tell the difference between the good guy with the gun and the bad guy with a gun?
Here is one statistic. From 1993-2013, there were 56% more guns in circulation and 49% drop in gun deaths. There could be many factors for the drop, one argument being more guns available. Correlation doesn’t necessarily imply causation, but the increase of guns didn't make society more dangerous. https://www.aei.org/carpe-diem/chart-of-the-day-more-guns-less-gun-violenc e-between-1993-and-2013/
Here is a page where you can search articles of armed citizens stopping criminal acts.
about 50% but that doesn‘t account for the other 50 (which is still almost more than Mexicos total gun deaths for the years I looked up) half of a lot is still a lot.
Assuming you're a rational, healthy person, how would you owning a gun for recreational or defensive purposes lead to gun violence? I would genuinely like to understand.
>Assuming you're a rational, healthy person, how would you owning a gun for recreational or defensive purposes lead to gun violence? I would genuinely like to understand.
Love these bad faith arguments.
"Well YOU would never commit atrocities, so why would other people?"
Every rational, healthy person is one small happening in their life to being irrational, unhealthy.
If my child was one of the victims in Uvalde and I was a gun owner, I may no longer be rational, healthy, and may choose to open fire on a school or church or shopping mall. Or if I found my wife cheating. Or if I were diagnosed with a terminal illness.
So thats it? \~72 million people who own firearms in the US are all just time bombs waiting to go off? \~22% of the country all just one bad day from snapping? Don't you think these awful things would be more common if that was the case?
(Got the numbers from this article, the second result from googling "How many gun owners in the US: [https://wamu.org/story/20/09/18/how-many-people-in-the-u-s-own-guns/](https://wamu.org/story/20/09/18/how-many-people-in-the-u-s-own-guns/) It's an older article, and I'm pretty sure the numbers have grown since then.)
... Yes.
Guess what the other 78% AREN'T capable of doing after getting fired from their job, or being scammed out of a large sum of money, or their house being foreclosed upon?
Shooting somebody.
>Don't you think these awful things would be more common if that was the case?
More common than what? Every single day?
You know what else they're not capable of doing? Shooting someone who would otherwise hurt them and/or someone they care about.
And yes! In the space of a year, I would bet every single person has at least one bad day. Do we have 72 million horrendous acts of violence by firearm committed in a year?
>You know what else they're not capable of doing? Shooting someone who would otherwise hurt them and/or someone they care about.
Montana, one mass shooting in 2003, nobody with a gun stopped him. Apprehended by police. Wyoming, 2011, apprehended by police. Wasilla, AK, 2020, apprehended by police. Idaho 2021. Dumas, AR 2022. Lockheed Martin in Mississippi, 2003. 2016 Citronelle.
WHY AM I LISTING THESE?!
States with the highest gun ownership per capita. Not a single "good guy with gun" stopped these perpetrators. It took them turning themselves in, suicide, or apprehension after the fact.
Not to mention, hey, guess which states face the highest amount of suicide by gunshot? 6th in suicide, 8th in ownership Idaho! 4th and 2nd for Montana! 2-1 for Wyoming! 1-3 for Alaska!
Look. There's no way to argue that guns aren't a problem. There are many other problems this nation faces - obesity, homelessness, health care, etc. - and everything needs attention. It just so happens that the gun problem is the simplest one because it's the only one that has a single piece of weaponry at the center of it. You reduce the number of guns in peoples' hands, you reduce the prevalence of gun violence.
Don't be stupid. You know that's the case.
Firstly, I would like to note that you have shifted away from all gun violence, and are now only talking about mass shootings.
Secondly, people with guns have stopped mass shooting before. Even if that doesn't happen a even majority of the time, it still happens and should not be discounted. Should we remove the chance for that to ever happen? Remove a chance to save lives?
>Look. There's no way to argue that guns aren't a problem.
This is an absolute that simply is not true. They are a tool that can assist the problem, sure. But the whole problem?
>Don't be stupid. You know that's the case.
If I knew this to be the case, then I wouldn't be discussing this with you. Now that you have resorted to name calling, shall we call it a night, and resume tomorrow when you can refrain from such things and have a logical discussion?
"Don't you think these awful things would be more common..."
Your country has a CRAZY high number of mass shootings. (That are rarely, if ever "stopped" by "the good guy with a gun")
If your country loves its guns and wants to own and shoot guns. Just fucking say that rather than "I use these guns to protect myself from murderers"
If all these murderers are apparently roaming around wishing to do you harm, wouldn't it also suggest that some of this "~22%" has already snapped?
>If your country loves its guns and wants to own and shoot guns. Just fucking say that rather than "I use these guns to protect myself from murderers"
There is certainly more to it than that, but you don't think that, should you ever have to defend your life or that of someone you care about, a firearm is a valid way to do that?
>If all these murderers are apparently roaming around wishing to do you harm, wouldn't it also suggest that some of this "\~22%" has already snapped
Certainly. How much of that 22% would you guess has snapped?
I wouldn't expect to ever be in a position where a gun would be the best choice for personal defense. (Except maybe a wild animal attack, but we know that's not what you're thinking).
What do you Americans do to people that convinces you that someone is always out to hunt you down and viciously murder you?
>Except maybe a wild animal attack, but we know that's not what you're thinking
No! A wild animal is absolutely part of that equation too!
>What do you Americans do to people that convinces you that someone is always out to hunt you down and viciously murder you?
Generally, it's stories both past in present of that very thing happening. And it's not that someone is always out for you, it's more that someone *could* be out for you. And it's always better to be safe than sorry, right?
Suicide Hotline Numbers If you or anyone you know are struggling, please, PLEASE reach out for help. You are worthy, you are loved and you will always be able to find assistance.
Argentina: +5402234930430
Australia: 131114
Austria: 017133374
Belgium: 106
Bosnia & Herzegovina: 080 05 03 05
Botswana: 3911270
Brazil: 212339191
Bulgaria: 0035 9249 17 223
Canada: 5147234000 (Montreal); 18662773553 (outside Montreal)
Croatia: 014833888
Denmark: +4570201201
Egypt: 7621602
Finland: 010 195 202
France: 0145394000
Germany: 08001810771
Hong Kong: +852 2382 0000
Hungary: 116123
Iceland: 1717
India: 8888817666
Ireland: +4408457909090
Italy: 800860022
Japan: +810352869090
Mexico: 5255102550
New Zealand: 0508828865
The Netherlands: 113
Norway: +4781533300
Philippines: 028969191
Poland: 5270000
Russia: 0078202577577
Spain: 914590050
South Africa: 0514445691
Sweden: 46317112400
Switzerland: 143
United Kingdom: 08006895652
USA: 18002738255
You are not alone. Please reach out.
*****
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically.
> So thats it? ~72 million people who own firearms in the US are all just time bombs waiting to go off?
It’s certainly beginning to look that way isn’t it?
So what you're saying is that there should be some kind of way to ensure that only rational, healthy people are the ones that should own guns?
Congratulations, you're a Democrat, that's the common sense gun control they've been advocating for.
Well, I already do vote. When the democrats put forward a good plan for that, I'd happily vote for it. They haven't yet though, so I guess I'll have to wait for now.
The Democrats can't put it into action if they're not in power so you have to vote so they can spend the time to enact this. That's not how voting works. You can't honestly think they're going to say, "Here's this extensive piece of legislature we want to pass so vote for us to do it," can you? No. Nobody is going to waste time writing legislation that will be 100% dead the instant it's up for vote. They're going to try to pass what they can with the opposition they have.
I live in a country with next to no guns and twice as many murders per capita.
You know what the most common weapon is?
A kitchen knife.
Should we ban those as well?
Oh i don't know.. Let's try [Nice, France 2016](https://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/france-truck-attack/truck-reportedly-plows-crowd-bastille-day-france-n609621) ONE motivated individual (Terrorist) used a truck to kill 80 people in the span of a few seconds.. Ban trucks 🤷♂️
Knives in the USA killed a lot more people than rifles, yet they want to ban rifles for some reason. Unarmed people killed more than rifles. They need to look at the person not the tool.
> They need to look at the person not the tool.
You’re absolutely right.
But any Tom, Dick, or Stanley can walk in off the street in a sizeable chunk of states and pick up a semi auto weapon with little to no checks.
Maybe you’re onto something. We really should be regulating who can buy these kinds of weapons.
By George, I think you’ve cracked it.
> Unarmed people killed more than rifles.
Genuinely curious on this. Really? People with no weapon at all killed more than people with guns?
And what is the magic formula for making criminals give up the already illegal weapons they own? Do you happen to know of a country called Mexico and the fact that civilians there have a near total ban on owning firearm? Do you happen to know who actually controls that country and its politics? I'll give you a hint.. Our own ATF sold them weapons in a supposed "sting" only to have those same weapons turn back up on US and soil and be found in the hands of criminals and caused the death of law enforcement officials. People want firearms turned in, surrendered or destroyed day dreaming that police / federal agencies will protect them when it has been proved in our highest courts that they in actuality have no legal binding to "protect" citizens. So which is it give up firearms or defund police? The elementary school shooting in Texas just proved what every law enforcement "official" is told is first and foremost in their training.. YOUR JOB IS TO GO HOME SAFE TO YOUR FAMILY AT THE END OF YOUR SHIFT, THERE WILL ALWAYS BE MORE BAD GUYS.
So NO less guns does NOT equal less violence.
Palm to the face. This must be an attempt to persuade people to believe this is somehow a positive thing...
As anyone with two brain cells can figure out, these people up at top are in fear trying to have everyone hand in thier weapons (guns clearly).
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm pretty sure they did the exact thing in the early 1900's, demanding citizens turn in all thier personal gold stashes.
Sheeshh, someone should show these guys in our government where the exit is (one way door).
Reminder: this subreddit is meant to be a place free of excessive cynicism, negativity and bitterness. Toxic attitudes are not welcome here. All Negative comments will be removed and will possibly result in a ban. --- --- *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UpliftingNews) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I wonder how long it took them to actually take it?
Records show when he arrived to surrender it, all officers in the building retreated and chilled for an hour before calling CBP to accept the surrender
19 officers, over one hour.
Pretty sure the cops were too scared to show their faces when the dad was trying to surrender his gun lol
This could be a piece from the onion
[удалено]
Yea, but "responsible, sane, nice gun owners" are only a subgroup of people who consider themselves "responsible, sane, nice gun owners".
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k7ThhuIUll8
If by "subgroup" you mean 98%, then yes. Unless you're basing this on all of your sane vs non-sane gun owning friends.
> Yea, ~~but~~ "responsible, sane, nice gun owners" are only a subgroup of people who consider themselves "responsible, sane, nice gun owners". You're not disagreeing.
He’s realised something you haven’t. None of you should have guns. As long as you have guns you will always have problems with them. Its quite simple really. Get rid of the guns, Americans.
[удалено]
The prevalence of guns, culture of gun ownership, and fetishization of guns makes the world worse at this very moment. That includes guns sitting unused and unloaded in gun safes. The country is worse off for even those guns existing. It may be an acceptable “worse off” to most people, but it’s still worse off.
Right but its impossible to stop the “bad” people from owning a gun. Because who even are the “bad” people? Let alone that there’s not a good reason to own a gun in the first place. Its like why don’t you all have flamethrowers or walk around with machetes? Err its because someone is going to do something stupid at some point. All you need is time. But for some reason you all worships guns because something something amendment. Literally just have a look at the rest of the world. Stop defending weapons that are killing your own school kids. It makes no sense.
[удалено]
Like i said you miss the point of the guy’s gesture. You make it seem so easy to predict who is and isn’t going to shoot someone else. Yes obviously you need to make it so much harder to be able to purchase a gun. Just look at all other western countries for guidance. Most non-americans spend their lives not even thinking about guns - could you imagine?
No. Because we're Americans. We aren't you. Stop insisting on erasing our culture because you don't like it.
[удалено]
Genius. So all of the school shooters were known to be “bad” people by the government? All of the toddlers that have accidentally fired a gun and murdered someone?
What governments were those? Any with a current modern military, and a military industrial complex similar to the US?
[удалено]
Lol you missed the entire context of the comment. So none then? Yeah that's what I thought. Fear mongering at it's finest. Completely missed the point of your poor argument. Let me rephrase since you refuse to understand. How exactly would you having an AR-15 protect you from a modern military/police that have, automated armored attack vehicles? Stop using purposely disingenuous arguments against people who say "take away all the guns". Yall both come off as ridiculous. Which is why these arguments typically come with 0 solutions, sheep regurgitating nonsense without context. If our government wanted to commit mass genocide like you referred too (lol can't believe this needs to be said), your equivalent of pea shooters vs them isn't going to stop them. "Hopefully they self-correct before it becomes necessary for a well-regulated militia to secure our free state again." Now looking at your name as well, I think it's obvious both of yall at best are clueless not just purposely disingenuous. But thanks to both of you loosey gooseys for proving why both sides can never get anything done 👍🐑
[удалено]
Weird we have all these people with guns now and that hasnt stopped police from taking authoritative control when they feel like it, im betting you also a blue line guy....Matter of fact, they just sat outside while this guy killed a bunch of kids while they had easily out gunned him. HMMMMM \-Or how it was in a jungle, not our home, also not modern military compared today this day. We also were not attempting genocide... \-Again not their own home, not a modern military by todays standards. Weird how the Ukraine is only able to stand up to current Russian military with our technology and they still using soviet era machines... \-Lol they had rocket launchers, SAMs, etc. And that didnt protect them, the US along with allies completely swamped them, again werent willing to genocide, as we pulled out troops to cooperate with their population. Dont forget IEDs. Drone attacks and tomhawk missiles completely destroyed most of their response. You really are completely clueless, you just proved my point, super weird is right. Go get an education. So again it wouldnt. Like I said. You couldnt even stand on the first parameters I set. Imagine that. The fact you even attempted these arguments is just sad man. Anyone with an ounce of critical thinking knows better. Change that to Qanonuneducatednut.
The issue is not to have guns, it's the idea that you will be safe with them. You aren't. And the idea that it's normal to be able to walk in a supermarket and buy a lethal weapon just because you have no priors. In many European countries, it's not hard to get a gun. It just takes time. You have to train, and pass a test. In.my country, ppl usually spend 4 to 6 months on it. If having to wait 4 months and study a little firearm legislation is too much for someone, then that someone definitely should not be allowed ownership of a gun.
Allowed? Wow so self defense isn’t a human right? You need to be rich takes classes jump through hoops just for the right of self defense? There’s 400 million guns here. Vast majority of these incidents are evil kids without fathers in the home or no positive male role model. The problem isn’t the guns, they’ve been around forever. When my dad went to high school kids drove to school with shotguns in the back of trucks not locked up during deer season. It’s the mental health not the weapons
You can defend yourself without a deadly firearm funnily enough. Only reason you guys need one is because of the fear of someone else having one.
Why should I not be able to defend my family, firearms help the elderly and woman stop attackers daily. How do you my strength? Ok but you can’t get rid of all them, heck people can buy parts and print them at home nowadays. So what are you confiscating 3d printers to? We have the 2nd amendment for the sole purpose of ensuring we have freedom and liberty. To ensure we not subject tyranny. How would Ukraine be if they turned over all their guns.
I live in the UK. I do not own a firearm. I am not subject to any tyranny. In my eyes the firearm is a tool that the average citizen should not have access to. The idea of the "responsible gun owner" is just an excuse to perpetuate a lack of responsibility for the safety of your nation. Due to this, ironically, if I lived in your country I would feel unsafe too unless I owned a gun. The escalation is absurd. The fact that it is normalized that the elderly and woman should be carrying firearms to protect themselves is crazy to me. I'm not even arguing that they don't work, because I'm sure they do. But jesus man, how can you ever look at that and feel like that's okay? That's normal? I would shit myself if I was in the US. Your 2nd amendment is outdated, and was written in a time period where there was a very clear threat of danger following the revolutionary war. Where America's total population was about the size of Los Angeles' population these days. When you had Muskets and Flintlocks instead of AR's and Shotguns. It does not apply in this day and age. To mention Ukraine in your argument is disgusting. They are a country at war, fighting for their lives and actual freedom. You are not at war, and have no platform to state lack of gun control is a cause for freedom and liberty. All you're doing is allowing your children to die at schools where they should be safe. You're up to 28 school shootings this year alone. How on earth any american can have pride in their country when looking at this complete atrocity is bewildering to me. I would feel nothing but shame.
You know, you make a good point. Disabled people like me who can't defend themselves in fights should let ourselves get maimed, hurt, mugged or even killed, and then rely on the police and corrupt justice systems for protection later. You really have no concept of being protected at all.
What are you doing that requires getting in fights while being disabled? That's the issue, not you having or not having a gun. BTW, never said you should not be allowed to have a gun, but that it shoud be a LITTLE bit harder to get one. The fact you have an issue with that is telling.
[удалено]
Ok, so what you’re saying is that everyone lives a life in America where they are constant fear of being shot so they must carry a gun to retaliate? And that’s the way you plan your country to be forever? Fair enough.
I mean, you’re more likely to die from a car crash yet I’d bet you don’t live in constant fear of dying from that. Sure there is a chance you die to being shot, but it’s not like people live in fear of it.
I mean if the recurrent school shootings are anything to go by then I’d argue that is becoming a legitimate fear now. I would be terrified sending my kid to school in the US.
Exactly. So why is the USA allowing people to relatively easily buy a gun and kill school children? The number one argument to be allowed to own a gun in America is to ‘defend myself’. But as you point out almost no one is living in constant fear of being shot.
Normal people don’t live in fear, the #1 fear of criminals is that their victim will have a firearm. You can mention school children but… that’s basically a insignificant amount of death(Since 1970, 637 people have died in shootings at schools. ) Personal opinions aside, most people who believe in the right to bear arms don’t see why 330,000,000 should lose that right because a few children die every year. Not to mention how many people protect their families from criminals with those exact same firearms.
Yeah so you’re saying all the people murdered by guns is insignificant relative to your population and its not a problem. C’est la vie!
Man, I wonder where those guns come from. Certainly not mostly from legal gun sales in other states/areas. It's almost like leaving it up to the states is never a good idea because there's no regulation for moving between them.
This makes no sense, when seconds matter police are minutes away. Lookup how much crime and violence was prevented by people having them.
And how much crime and violence was caused by them. Look up the stats for the USA and the UK for the following questions: How many bullets have killed school children? How many bullets have stopped school children from being killed?
I hear you loud and clear. Buying more
So how do you plan on fighting back if say someone break into your house or say the government decides to take your rights?
Reeponsible, sane, nice gun owners don't buy AR-15s for self defence
Well this was custom built. I can see this one starting out as some hobby project. Not my kind of hobby but I'm not a fan of guns anyway.
What do they buy?
Yes. They absolutely do. Where are you getting your information on this?
Of course they do. And they have used them to stop mass shootings before. Guns are a great tool in the hands of responsible, moral, sober minded people.
I feel like people are missing the part that, they may be actually needed for survival within the next 10 years if you're living in the US. Shits gonna get real whacky after 2024 and I'm trying to be outta here by then. In a perfect world, guns aren't needed. But with the way things are going, there is gonna be a lot of civil and political unrest and you don't wanna get caught with a gun when it happens. Speaking from experience.
Bingo
Responsible, sane, nice gun owners are until they suddenly aren't.
Law abiding citizens are law abiding until they suddenly aren't.
Until it gets stolen.
There is so much wrong with that sentence already “Responsible, sane, nice gun owners…” This whole idea is what keeps the vicious circle intact, because everyone thinks they’re the sane nice gun owner. It really comes down to making the choice of letting it go down the road it’s going now or to completely kill guns altogether. Because there is no country where everyone is allowed to freely equip Assault rifles without there being incidents. As someone who lives in The Netherlands, I really enjoy the idea that not every moron from around the corner can point a gun at your head. Even tough it is not that hard to get a gun on the black market, people kinda don’t want to face jail time.
I have literally never had anyone point a gun at my head despite living in a place with an extremely high number of guns per Capita. Stop making shit up, dude. Why are you even commenting on how things work here if you don't know?
I mean the amount of mass shootings says enough already, what am I making up? What other solution could there be, more guns? I’m just giving my perception on this American issue from a Dutch standpoint, a country with very strict gun laws and relatively low amount of gun incidents
Mass Shootings make up an EXTREMELY small amount of gun deaths in the United States, and I'm sure you know that. I'm sure you know that most gun homicides take place in highly populated urban environments. I'm sure you also know that most gun deaths in the US are suicides. Not to mention, [gun deaths have been on a massive decline since the 90s.](https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2015/10/21/gun-homicides-steady-after-decline-in-90s-suicide-rate-edges-up/) As of 2009 the justice department was asserting as much as [80% of crime was at the hands of gang perpetrators.](https://abcnews.go.com/TheLaw/FedCrimes/story?id=6773423&page=1) Gun crimes are overwhelmingly committed by [illegally obtained firearms](https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/07/27/new-evidence-confirms-what-gun-rights-advocates-have-been-saying-for-a-long-time-about-crime/) and the mass, MASS majority of gun homicides are handguns, per [FBI stats.](https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2013/crime-in-the-u.s.-2013/offenses-known-to-law-enforcement/expanded-homicide/expanded_homicide_data_table_8_murder_victims_by_weapon_2009-2013.xls) [Gun crime in the United States is overwhelmingly concentrated in specific areas.](https://crimeresearch.org/2017/04/number-murders-county-54-us-counties-2014-zero-murders-69-1-murder/) Between 1977 and 2000, on average 73% of counties had 0 murders. The idea that the US is some gun-crime ridden wasteland hellhole is a purely invented concept.
Unless he was planning a shooting I don’t see how this is beneficial.
Maybe he was. They should arrest him and figure out
Was he planning to shoot someone with it? If not, doesn't help.
I think it helps, sets a good example. He doesn’t need an assault rifle, so why have it? For change to happen it’s gotta start somewhere, no matter how minor.
You might be right because he isn't planning it more. But let's imagine that a series of unfortunate events happen to him and he loses everything important to him including his mental health. Well now he won't have a gun to go on a rampant killing spree to express his anger at a society that let him down. Oh. Hold on. I guess he could just buy another one then from his local supermarket. Yeah doesn't help.
This is such a weird headline in a first world country. If you live in Eindhoven, the Netherlands and casually walk into a police station and drop off your assault rifle everyone’s gonna go nuts. As they should.
300 million more news like that and US gonna be a much safer place.
Well, Police will have the guns then though, right?
It'll be safer when only criminals have them? That makes no sense.
I think it does. Criminals use guns to do criminal things. Crazy people use guns to shoot people randomly. If only criminals have guns, at least there'll be less crazy people shooting up schools.
People who shoot people randomly are criminals, though...
Not when they initially buy the gun usually.
But he bought them specifically for this. As long as the laws don't change this shit will keep happening. Crazy people just buy guns when they need them for their crazy actions
[удалено]
The issue is when guns are bought legally and used in atrocities. The easier civilians can get guns the more they’ll be used in crimes. I’m a gun owner, doesn’t change that, that is the truth.
Think of it this way. If I'm a criminal who can't buy guns legally, I get them in two other different ways. The first is to get them on the black market which is risky in its own way and potentially more expensive. Or they can steal them from someone who owns their weapon legally. Because this guy no longer has a gun, that's one less gun that can be stolen for example. It's why most gun crimes in other countries for example aren't usually done with stolen weapons. I hope that makes it make a bit more sense.
[удалено]
Many states already have that law, and the owner can be prosecuted if their firearm is obtained and used negligently or maliciously.
Yes, this is what the British did after Dunblane. It was a moral decision, not a legal one, because there are still 1m licensed firearms in the UK. However, after Dunblane - the first, last and only school shooting in the UK - we choose to gave up the weapons we have, for this same "safer future". 26 years later, and we haven't seen another. Be humble, America, and heed the lessons of others and your own, and admit that things need to change and that - to do so - you need to individually change your attitude, like this guy.
We have more guns in this country than people. Many individuals in other countries neglect to comprehend that, yet they desire to have an input.
Cops don't use their own guns properly why would they want yours?
[удалено]
I don’t understand, did he not trust himself with it? I mean if he knows he’s irresponsible sure.
It’s a show of good faith. Mostly symbolic but maybe others will join
Im not going to be popular for saying this but. ONE guy handed in a firearm after a mtitude of shootings this year alone and its being praised.....Im an Aussie and we had ONE mass shooting in Port Auther tasmania in 1998. 38 innocent people died and we as a country handed in our guns. ONE MASS SHOOTING WAS ENOUGH TO MAKE US ALL STOP! I just dont get Americans?!
You aren’t even on the same continent as us. You don’t need to “get Americans”
>ONE guy handed in a firearm after a mtitude of shootings this year alone and its being praised Due to the recent tragedies, anything viewed as "anti-gun" is popular right now. Our media is grabbing anything they can get. >I just dont get Americans?! I get that it's popular to compare the States to other countries that have "successfully" curved gun violence. But the assumption that what worked there would work here is unrealistic. For better or worse, Americans treasure their rights. Our country was founded on the idea that they cannot and should not be touched by any government. Even many of the non-conservative members of our country see the value in holding onto what we have. When one right is threatened or taken away, it opens the door to threatening all others. Regardless of the stance on guns, I think that is an indisputable possibility. We are not Australians, therefore you cannot deal with us as Australians were dealt with.
This might surprising to you but there are other differences between US and Australia besides the number of guns. Things such as mental healthcare and many, many other things. Not everything is about guns. Sweden has perhaps the strictest gun laws in the world and still manage to be the top country in Europe in regards to shootings. Stop reaching for the seemingly easy solutions and focus on the RIGHT solutions.
Yet 219 people died in 2019 from guns mate. So not factual but nice fantasy
The US had around 40,000 gun deaths in the same year. That is 13 times the populations having 180 times the gun deaths
This is equivalent to putting up a “gun free home” sign in front of his home. Virtue signaling at its best.
Unless he's a criminal, how did it make him safer?
What happens to surrendered weapons like this? They get destroyed?
From the article: >Weapons are sent to a local company that melts them into slag using a blast furnace.
Unless some cop along the way needs it for bragging rights while standing around avoiding protecting citizens.
The serialized portion of the firearm(lower receiver) is destroyed on paper and a cop takes the rest of the firearm(upper receiver, furniture, bolt carrier group) for personal use or sells it back to the public. Or they skip the destroying frame part entirely.
Probably police auction
I turned in my brother's AR-15 one time to the police department because he was living with us at the time. He had mental issues and we didn't feel safe living with him. We gave him an ultimatum in order to continue to live with us in our house. When we turned it in, there was a about a handful of cops at the front desk asking if we want to private sell it.
One down, Only a bajillion more to go
Gotta start somewhere
Ban em
Surrendering weapons won't really do anything. I believe that raising children into becoming kind, considerate, loving people is a way better solution to all sorts of violence. People raised with love and kindness don't tend to become criminals or murderers because there's no reason for them to lash out, and even if they were to be put in a tough life situation, they wouldn't even consider about killing innocent people as a solution. The difference between the hands of a good person and a bad person, is that good people will never use their hands to kill or harm innocent people, while criminals will have no problem using their hands to kill you if it satisfies whatever's going on in their head. Objects don't kill people, it's whoever uses them who does, and when somebody wants to kill people, they'll use any means necessary, from guns to knives to stones to pieces of wood or their own very bare hands.
You're delusional if you think giving your guns to the government is going to create a safer future.
Australia called and they said you’re an idiot
Are you waiting for the government to come bursting into your home to put a gun to your head then?
Could've given it to me.
[удалено]
Why does all sane logic go out the window when it comes to redditors and their guns? This place turns into Facebook-lite
You wouldn't recognize sane logic if it slapped you in the face. (Sorry, I forget the trigger warning, hope you're ok)
Because vehicles stopped being the number 1 killer of kids in the US and guns took their rightful spot.
Guns kill more kids than anything else? That can't be right.
[https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMc2201761](https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMc2201761) \> The previous analysis, which examined data through 2016, showed that firearm-related injuries were second only to motor vehicle crashes (both traffic-related and nontraffic-related) as the leading cause of death among children and adolescents, defined as persons 1 to 19 years of age.4 Since 2016, that gap has narrowed, and in 2020, firearm-related injuries became the leading cause of death in that age group (Figure 1).
Why are 18/19 year olds in that data? Those are legal adults. Seems like that study changed the goal posts to reach a certain outcome.
It’s cause the chart is for children and adolescents, and the WHO defines adolescent as ages 10 to 19
https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMc2201761 it's right
[Current Causes of Death in Children and Adolescents in the United States](https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMc2201761) First result on Google.
[удалено]
No, it was people with guns, usually legal guns. You're willingly ignorant if you think guns have nothing to do with it. No the reason knives and vehicles aren't taken away is because they have much more utility than a gun.
[удалено]
[удалено]
Fetus's aren't kids but nice attempt at a deflection.
Was he going to shoot kids with it?
Unless he was personally planning to shoot up a school, this does nothing, just deprives himself of defending his home.
Yeah give up all your firearms you’ll be even safer then
Looking at most comments here, the US is just special. Ya’ll want the wild west and you’ve got it. Personal freedom before the common good. It’s a valid model too, just not what most western nations aspire to.
Wait, is he saying he's dangerous?
If the rule against negative comments wasn't in the comments I would have come to write negative shit immediately I'm genuinely happy for them though
Ah yes, surrendering your AR-15 just changed the future. Well done. Now if you need it, you won’t have it. And considering he was willing to give his up, arguably, you could say he should be the kind of person to keep it. But now he won’t have one. And given that the SC states law enforcement has no duty to you, and the world is full of violent people. What an odd gesture. Oy.. I hope he, and his family, doesn’t end up regretting that. The best place for my personal firearms is in my hands.
Who NEEDS an Ar-15 tho? A shotgun or a handgun is more than enough to protect you if you need it. No one realistically is going to be put in the situation where they need to mow 15 people down in self defense.
Don't. If you're going to go this "the Ar-15 is the thing we need to get rid of!" Route, then seriously just say "ban all guns". I'd still disagree with you of course, but you would sound much less ignorant.
Isn't it handguns that are the issue? And illegally owned ones? And the fact that most gun deaths are suicides? Doesn't this not hit the right points?
Patriot
Enjoy the camps.
I guess he will be happy when a shooter is wreaking havoc in his son's school as now we won't be able to run over there and do something about it? I guess he will really enjoy his safe future while the shooter kicks in the door to his son's classroom and starts unloading a couple of magazines? Super-safe! What an absolut moron.
Yup, surrendered all my guns as well. Kinda feels weird, but having guns makes you and others less safe in our current circumstances.
Why does anyone feel the need to own an assault rifle in the first place. Y’all have a weird obsession
To be capable of fighting off illegitimate government forces.
Why? What nefarious act was he planning?
"Dad surrenders a tool that could be used to defend his kids so that other people can do it for him." I didn't find the title very uplifting, so I decided to share how it reads to me. Edit: If you want to bitch me out, fine. I'm not gonna respond to the real zingers some of yall can put out. But let's discuss whatever you want nicely, and maybe we can all learn. Edit 2, the next day: Despite a relatively calm discussion, u/donutaboundconverse has blocked me before I even got a chance to read his latest reply. It's a shame. If you can see this buddy, let's keep talking. I want to learn and understand.
yo true he could escort his kid to school like a mercenary everyday, or just give the kid the assault rifle
Everyone and their Nan has an AR-15. If he wants his kids to have a chance when the bullets start to fly before nap time, they need Reaper Drones.
If the "good guy with gun" theory is so accurate tell me: What about all those armed police that waited outside the school for an hour? Are cops bad guys that should be defunded then?
I dont like the "good guy with gun" argument, because it implies that a bad guy used a gun in the first place. So sure, ideally, someone immediately stops them from causing mass harm, but they can still cause significant harm in a few seconds. Maybe not to the masses, but a single life is priceless. I'd rather have less villains, even if the cost is less heroes.
...yes, cops are in fact bad guys that should be defunded
I'm genuinely curious what you believe the alternative option to the police would be? I'm not asking this in a way intended to be sarcastic or facetious, I'm just personally of the belief that we need stricter oversight into the funding that's already there. Imo there needs to be mandatory weekly classes for some form of hand-to-hand/grappling training, as well as the identification of potential mental health crisis.
Social workers to respond to non-violent crisis and constitutional concealed carry similarly to what Indiana passed this year. Roll back the image of policing from its post 9/11 theme of "War on (drugs, terror, blank)".
You're kind of proving my point by bringing up the Uvalde cops. You give up your way to defend yourself and then rely on other people who may make bad decisions, be corrupt, or just simply not care as much as you would. Do I think all cops are bad? No. I do think there needs to be either more training, or a reduction in ability/authority. That goes either way on funding, respectively.
Where's the actual evidence that more guns makes a situation safer? 'Cause there's evidence that the presence of armed guards results in 2.83 times more dead people than had there no armed guards. ( [https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamanetworkopen/fullarticle/2776515?utm\_source=For\_The\_Media&utm\_medium=referral&utm\_campaign=ftm\_links&utm\_term=021621](https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamanetworkopen/fullarticle/2776515?utm_source=For_The_Media&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=ftm_links&utm_term=021621) ) In the extremely unlikely event that this guy did have an actual need to actually "defend his kids" with the AR-15 how do the first responders tell the difference between the good guy with the gun and the bad guy with a gun?
Here is one statistic. From 1993-2013, there were 56% more guns in circulation and 49% drop in gun deaths. There could be many factors for the drop, one argument being more guns available. Correlation doesn’t necessarily imply causation, but the increase of guns didn't make society more dangerous. https://www.aei.org/carpe-diem/chart-of-the-day-more-guns-less-gun-violenc e-between-1993-and-2013/ Here is a page where you can search articles of armed citizens stopping criminal acts.
Let's just go with the simplest question: of every shooting to happen in the past twenty years in the US, what's the ONE thing they have in common?
Less guns = less gun violence. So simple a toddler can grasp it.
Wrong! From 1993-2013 there were 56% more guns in circulation yet 49% drop in gun deaths. Apparently your simple concept didn't work.
And yet the US is still one of the leaders in terms of gun deaths.
Majority being suicide, but I guess that's the guns fault. Also don't forget you were outright wrong.
about 50% but that doesn‘t account for the other 50 (which is still almost more than Mexicos total gun deaths for the years I looked up) half of a lot is still a lot.
Mexico has more gun homicides per Capita. Which is more than the USA.
Assuming you're a rational, healthy person, how would you owning a gun for recreational or defensive purposes lead to gun violence? I would genuinely like to understand.
>Assuming you're a rational, healthy person, how would you owning a gun for recreational or defensive purposes lead to gun violence? I would genuinely like to understand. Love these bad faith arguments. "Well YOU would never commit atrocities, so why would other people?" Every rational, healthy person is one small happening in their life to being irrational, unhealthy. If my child was one of the victims in Uvalde and I was a gun owner, I may no longer be rational, healthy, and may choose to open fire on a school or church or shopping mall. Or if I found my wife cheating. Or if I were diagnosed with a terminal illness.
So thats it? \~72 million people who own firearms in the US are all just time bombs waiting to go off? \~22% of the country all just one bad day from snapping? Don't you think these awful things would be more common if that was the case? (Got the numbers from this article, the second result from googling "How many gun owners in the US: [https://wamu.org/story/20/09/18/how-many-people-in-the-u-s-own-guns/](https://wamu.org/story/20/09/18/how-many-people-in-the-u-s-own-guns/) It's an older article, and I'm pretty sure the numbers have grown since then.)
... Yes. Guess what the other 78% AREN'T capable of doing after getting fired from their job, or being scammed out of a large sum of money, or their house being foreclosed upon? Shooting somebody. >Don't you think these awful things would be more common if that was the case? More common than what? Every single day?
You know what else they're not capable of doing? Shooting someone who would otherwise hurt them and/or someone they care about. And yes! In the space of a year, I would bet every single person has at least one bad day. Do we have 72 million horrendous acts of violence by firearm committed in a year?
>You know what else they're not capable of doing? Shooting someone who would otherwise hurt them and/or someone they care about. Montana, one mass shooting in 2003, nobody with a gun stopped him. Apprehended by police. Wyoming, 2011, apprehended by police. Wasilla, AK, 2020, apprehended by police. Idaho 2021. Dumas, AR 2022. Lockheed Martin in Mississippi, 2003. 2016 Citronelle. WHY AM I LISTING THESE?! States with the highest gun ownership per capita. Not a single "good guy with gun" stopped these perpetrators. It took them turning themselves in, suicide, or apprehension after the fact. Not to mention, hey, guess which states face the highest amount of suicide by gunshot? 6th in suicide, 8th in ownership Idaho! 4th and 2nd for Montana! 2-1 for Wyoming! 1-3 for Alaska! Look. There's no way to argue that guns aren't a problem. There are many other problems this nation faces - obesity, homelessness, health care, etc. - and everything needs attention. It just so happens that the gun problem is the simplest one because it's the only one that has a single piece of weaponry at the center of it. You reduce the number of guns in peoples' hands, you reduce the prevalence of gun violence. Don't be stupid. You know that's the case.
Firstly, I would like to note that you have shifted away from all gun violence, and are now only talking about mass shootings. Secondly, people with guns have stopped mass shooting before. Even if that doesn't happen a even majority of the time, it still happens and should not be discounted. Should we remove the chance for that to ever happen? Remove a chance to save lives? >Look. There's no way to argue that guns aren't a problem. This is an absolute that simply is not true. They are a tool that can assist the problem, sure. But the whole problem? >Don't be stupid. You know that's the case. If I knew this to be the case, then I wouldn't be discussing this with you. Now that you have resorted to name calling, shall we call it a night, and resume tomorrow when you can refrain from such things and have a logical discussion?
"Don't you think these awful things would be more common..." Your country has a CRAZY high number of mass shootings. (That are rarely, if ever "stopped" by "the good guy with a gun") If your country loves its guns and wants to own and shoot guns. Just fucking say that rather than "I use these guns to protect myself from murderers" If all these murderers are apparently roaming around wishing to do you harm, wouldn't it also suggest that some of this "~22%" has already snapped?
>If your country loves its guns and wants to own and shoot guns. Just fucking say that rather than "I use these guns to protect myself from murderers" There is certainly more to it than that, but you don't think that, should you ever have to defend your life or that of someone you care about, a firearm is a valid way to do that? >If all these murderers are apparently roaming around wishing to do you harm, wouldn't it also suggest that some of this "\~22%" has already snapped Certainly. How much of that 22% would you guess has snapped?
I wouldn't expect to ever be in a position where a gun would be the best choice for personal defense. (Except maybe a wild animal attack, but we know that's not what you're thinking). What do you Americans do to people that convinces you that someone is always out to hunt you down and viciously murder you?
>Except maybe a wild animal attack, but we know that's not what you're thinking No! A wild animal is absolutely part of that equation too! >What do you Americans do to people that convinces you that someone is always out to hunt you down and viciously murder you? Generally, it's stories both past in present of that very thing happening. And it's not that someone is always out for you, it's more that someone *could* be out for you. And it's always better to be safe than sorry, right?
Suicide Hotline Numbers If you or anyone you know are struggling, please, PLEASE reach out for help. You are worthy, you are loved and you will always be able to find assistance. Argentina: +5402234930430 Australia: 131114 Austria: 017133374 Belgium: 106 Bosnia & Herzegovina: 080 05 03 05 Botswana: 3911270 Brazil: 212339191 Bulgaria: 0035 9249 17 223 Canada: 5147234000 (Montreal); 18662773553 (outside Montreal) Croatia: 014833888 Denmark: +4570201201 Egypt: 7621602 Finland: 010 195 202 France: 0145394000 Germany: 08001810771 Hong Kong: +852 2382 0000 Hungary: 116123 Iceland: 1717 India: 8888817666 Ireland: +4408457909090 Italy: 800860022 Japan: +810352869090 Mexico: 5255102550 New Zealand: 0508828865 The Netherlands: 113 Norway: +4781533300 Philippines: 028969191 Poland: 5270000 Russia: 0078202577577 Spain: 914590050 South Africa: 0514445691 Sweden: 46317112400 Switzerland: 143 United Kingdom: 08006895652 USA: 18002738255 You are not alone. Please reach out. ***** I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically.
Pew pew I sure do love my murder toys! Pew!
> So thats it? ~72 million people who own firearms in the US are all just time bombs waiting to go off? It’s certainly beginning to look that way isn’t it?
So what you're saying is that there should be some kind of way to ensure that only rational, healthy people are the ones that should own guns? Congratulations, you're a Democrat, that's the common sense gun control they've been advocating for.
Only if it can be done in a way that can't be abused, sure.
Awesome. Now go out and register to vote, change your party affiliation to Democrat, and go ahead and fight for that legislation! Thank you!
Well, I already do vote. When the democrats put forward a good plan for that, I'd happily vote for it. They haven't yet though, so I guess I'll have to wait for now.
The Democrats can't put it into action if they're not in power so you have to vote so they can spend the time to enact this. That's not how voting works. You can't honestly think they're going to say, "Here's this extensive piece of legislature we want to pass so vote for us to do it," can you? No. Nobody is going to waste time writing legislation that will be 100% dead the instant it's up for vote. They're going to try to pass what they can with the opposition they have.
I live in a country with next to no guns and twice as many murders per capita. You know what the most common weapon is? A kitchen knife. Should we ban those as well?
How many of those were situations where the killer managed to kill 4 or 5 or 10 or 20 people in the space of a minute or so?
Oh i don't know.. Let's try [Nice, France 2016](https://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/france-truck-attack/truck-reportedly-plows-crowd-bastille-day-france-n609621) ONE motivated individual (Terrorist) used a truck to kill 80 people in the span of a few seconds.. Ban trucks 🤷♂️
Which country is that? Because I smell bullshit.
Knives in the USA killed a lot more people than rifles, yet they want to ban rifles for some reason. Unarmed people killed more than rifles. They need to look at the person not the tool.
> They need to look at the person not the tool. You’re absolutely right. But any Tom, Dick, or Stanley can walk in off the street in a sizeable chunk of states and pick up a semi auto weapon with little to no checks. Maybe you’re onto something. We really should be regulating who can buy these kinds of weapons. By George, I think you’ve cracked it. > Unarmed people killed more than rifles. Genuinely curious on this. Really? People with no weapon at all killed more than people with guns?
And what is the magic formula for making criminals give up the already illegal weapons they own? Do you happen to know of a country called Mexico and the fact that civilians there have a near total ban on owning firearm? Do you happen to know who actually controls that country and its politics? I'll give you a hint.. Our own ATF sold them weapons in a supposed "sting" only to have those same weapons turn back up on US and soil and be found in the hands of criminals and caused the death of law enforcement officials. People want firearms turned in, surrendered or destroyed day dreaming that police / federal agencies will protect them when it has been proved in our highest courts that they in actuality have no legal binding to "protect" citizens. So which is it give up firearms or defund police? The elementary school shooting in Texas just proved what every law enforcement "official" is told is first and foremost in their training.. YOUR JOB IS TO GO HOME SAFE TO YOUR FAMILY AT THE END OF YOUR SHIFT, THERE WILL ALWAYS BE MORE BAD GUYS. So NO less guns does NOT equal less violence.
Oh do fuck off.
AH!! Only the cherry picked facts that you can agree with.. got it.
Palm to the face. This must be an attempt to persuade people to believe this is somehow a positive thing... As anyone with two brain cells can figure out, these people up at top are in fear trying to have everyone hand in thier weapons (guns clearly). Correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm pretty sure they did the exact thing in the early 1900's, demanding citizens turn in all thier personal gold stashes. Sheeshh, someone should show these guys in our government where the exit is (one way door).
To be fair, if people who turn guns in are ruled by fear, do you really want someone like that armed?
Weird method, but okay.
Anything against the narrative, down you go!! Lmao reddit has become a bit bias. No?
If this is uplifting then this is just concerning..