• shalafi@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    29
    ·
    6 months ago

    This shit didn’t happen when I was a kid, and we had far fewer regulations. LOL, you could mail order a gun from Sears and carry it in the rear-window gun rack.

    But I’m sure a man would unload on a park is exactly the sort who would obey regulations.

    • Varyk
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      36
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      6 months ago

      Are you referring to the time that one parent could work in a factory and afford a house + living expenses for a family of four?

      Those glory days before the civil rights movement?

      When urban population density was too low to justify suburbs?

      Before police had qualified immunity for every shooting?

      Of course in different times with different laws and circumstances, with different weapons and less availability, and lower urban densities, things were different.

      That’s completely irrelevant to the impact of gun regulations on the number of shootings; that is, the proven statistical correlation between gun regulations and fewer mass shootings.

      Your supposition that any man willing to commit a mass shooting would be able to get a gun is similarly fanciful and immaterial

      • catloaf@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        6 months ago

        I wouldn’t say it’s completely irrelevant to gun violence, but it’s very relevant to violence in general.

        • Varyk
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          6 months ago

          What’s the “it” you’re referring to here?

          • catloaf@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            6 months ago

            The things you listed as being different and completely irrelevant.

            • Varyk
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              6 months ago

              Got it. I think you misunderstood my comment.

              All the things I listed were the factors I found relevant to gun violence.

              The irrelevance I was referencing to was the anecdotal assumption of a single commenter that because he didn’t personally see as much gun violence when he was child, gun regulations don’t curb gun violence.

              Their argument is “there were no seat belts when I grew up, and we had fewer car accident fatalities”, implying that seat belts don’t protect people

              That’s a completely irrelevant statement to my point that “seat belts prevent car accident fatalities”; Besides being anecdotal, the statement is unqualified by the lower number of automobiles, the lower number of drivers, lower speed limits, and any number of relevant controlling factors.

              It’s nice for that one person that he didn’t see a lot of gun violence as a child, but completely irrelevant to the separate topic of the regulatory effectiveness.