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

        Yeah but that makes it harder for people to actually address the fact that high rates of firearm ownership is a necessary, but not sufficient, condition for high rates of homicide, which has consistently been correlated with a lack of socioeconomic mobility among young adult men across societies and times. But that’s hard, so instead we just sarcastically post “FREEDOM” and “now is not the time to address guns” while, ironically, never actually doing the difficult but necessary work of discussing the underlying structural economic conditions and caste dynamics which lead to this problem. Because that’s hard.

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

          High rates of gun ownership is neither a necessary nor sufficient condition for high rates of homicide. “Necessary” would imply that high homicide rate is flat out impossible without high gun ownership, which is clearly not true.

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

      Mentally incompetent Americans. Mentally incompetent people in civilized countries usually don’t even come close to guns.

      EDIT: Looks like the ammosexuals don’t like my take. Yes, people lile you are left unarmed for good in civilized countries, if you like it or not.