Run, you fucking piece of shit. Go go go gogogogogogog!

My niece told her grandmother about her fear of getting murdered at school. Feel that fear, asshole.

  • @PoliticalAgitator
    link
    69 months ago

    I mean that the good guy with a gun almost never actually stops shootings

    Last I looked, they had a lower success rate than unarmed people.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      59 months ago

      Last I looked, they had a lower success rate than unarmed people.

      I’m a firm support of much strong gun control laws, and so this claim is something I would really love to be true …which is exactly why I’m pausing here and asking to see the evidence. Confirmation bias is a hell of a drug.

      So what is this based on?

      • @PoliticalAgitator
        link
        3
        edit-2
        9 months ago

        It was a while back, so i can’t remember the caveats (if any). It may have been for that year or something. A quick dig looks like it holds up though.

        This media investigation, aided by Texas State University shows the stats.

        According to the data, citizens stopped shooters 50 times in the 316 attacks. But in only 10 out of those 50 incidents did citizens actually stop the shooter by using a gun. The other 40 times, it was with their hands or another weapon.

        It also briefly touches on the trauma when an actual good person kills someone.

        “I don’t feel like I killed a human,” says Wilson. “I killed an evil and that’s how I’m coping with the situation.”

        “The individual did not make any attempt to get up because of his head wound. He didn’t make any… it was just quivering and that was it.”

        He is actively forcing himself to not see the shooter as a person and it’s clear the image of the person he killed twitching on the ground will haunt him forever.

        The pro-gun crowd didn’t save that man, they sold him and everybody else in that church out. They armed the mass shooter then used Wilson as propaganda, claiming his trauma is actually the gold standard for dealing with gun violence and that teachers and targeted minorities should be enthusiastically following suit.

        I’m sure the fact that it would preserve or increase the profits of a lobby group that gives $16 million a year to Republicans is purely coincidence.

        After all, if an industry was causing massive social harm, they’d immediately cease operation for the public good, not suppress research and statistics about how many people they’d killled while astroturfing and hiring politicians as shills.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          -29 months ago

          But in only 10 out of those 50 incidents did citizens actually stop the shooter by using a gun.

          And this begs the question. . .what percentage of people actually carry a gun? If it’s less than 20% then that means gun owners were more effective at stopping it (well, it would actually be more complicated, but I’m just trying to demonstrate my point).

          • @PoliticalAgitator
            link
            19 months ago

            Not only is it more complicated, it doesn’t even matter.

            Around 80% of mass shooters bought the guns legally. Of the 20% remaining, the majority are teenagers who used their parent’s legally owned firearm.

            Criminals in America have better access to firearms than they do in anywhere else in the world, with many of the guns in South America being originally purchased from a store in the United States.

            This has resulted in a homicide rate that is far higher than it should be. Sort this list by homicide rate and take note of just how far before and after “United States” you have to scroll before finding a country you would consider “wealthy and stable”.

            As compensation for that, we’re told things like “the only thing that can stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun”. But the “good guys” have been given all the guns they want and they stop exactly fuck all. It’s not even close to the number of shootings they enable.

            So who gives a fuck how “effective” they are on paper? In the real world, police and unarmed civilians stop more mass shooters and it doesn’t require arming the mass shooters in the first place.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              09 months ago

              So who gives a fuck how “effective” they are on paper?

              If it doesn’t matter, why did you bring it up?

              • @PoliticalAgitator
                link
                1
                edit-2
                9 months ago

                Because you posted apologism using exactly that phrasing. You’ve also misinterpreted “You shouldn’t give a fuck” as meaning “I don’t give a fuck”.

                • @[email protected]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  19 months ago

                  Because you posted apologism using exactly that phrasing.

                  So, wait. . .it’s my fault you made a BS claim you can’t back up, despite the fact that you made the comment before I ever even posted in the thread? And I was posting “apologism” despite explicitly saying I want it to be true. Wow, I’m quite amazing! lol

                  You’ve also misinterpreted “You shouldn’t give a fuck” as meaning “I don’t give a fuck”.

                  At no point did you use the phrase “you shouldn’t give a fuck.” Another amazing thing by me misinterpreting something you didn’t even say. Man, I’m even outdoing myself today.

                  • @PoliticalAgitator
                    link
                    1
                    edit-2
                    9 months ago

                    So, wait. . .it’s my fault you made a BS claim you can’t back up, despite the fact that you made the comment before I ever even posted in the thread?

                    You mean the one I immediately backed up, that you could have fact checked yourself in seconds? Because “citizens with guns have stopped fewer mass shootings than unarmed civilians” is objectively true.

                    And I was posting “apologism” despite explicitly saying I want it to be true.

                    So? It’s the internet. People lie about who they are and what they think all the time, especially among the far-right. I’m not obligated to politely believe you.

                    And to put it bluntly, I don’t.

                    Your “do you have the stats” sounded like sealioning and when I gave you the benefit of the doubt and answered, your entire comment focused on trying to claw back a win for gun owners.

                    Now suddenly it’s a “BS fact”, despite still being objectively true. Are you sure you haven’t let your true feelings get involved?

                    At no point did you use the phrase “you shouldn’t give a fuck.” Another amazing thing by me misinterpreting something you didn’t even say. Man, I’m even outdoing myself today.

                    I also didn’t use the phrase “I don’t give a fuck”, but that didn’t stop you.