• PhlubbaDubba@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    3 months ago

    Weren’t the 70s and 80s the peak of violent crime in the US? Including armed violent crime?

    • GiveMemes@jlai.lu
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      Violent crime has pretty consistently dropped for the past century in the US with a small blip in the 90s often attributed to the prevalence of leaded gasoline and the higher propensity for violence that people exposed to it often had.

      School shootings still weren’t a big/common thing back then tho so I fail to see your point.

      • PhlubbaDubba@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        The point is that an all time peak in violent crime and violent gun crime would indicate you’re not disproving gun crime you’re just hiding it in dark numbers that you’re hoping we won’t think matter.

        Also that peak is statistically referred to as happening between the 70s and 90s, specifically quadrupling vs rates prior in the 60s and 50s, before declining afterwards, so you were kinda right.

        https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistory/comments/1b3jm3x/why_was_there_more_crime_in_the_us_in_1970s1980s/

        • GiveMemes@jlai.lu
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          10
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          3 months ago

          Sorry what context were we talking about? Oh yeah, school shootings. Also that’s still the point; it being a clear relationship. I don’t understand what your point is. You posed a whataboutism. They’re two different arguments.

          If you want to talk about gun crime and reform broadly we can. First, in the case of things like mental health checks, how do we decide what makes someone fit to get a firearm? How do we decide who gets to make that decision? How are we going to regulate firearm sales? How do we make it possible for private sales to exist while enforcing background checks and without causing undue burden. Btw you know you already need to get a backhround check to get a firearm except in a few circumstances, right?The American pseudo-left is often frothing at the mouth for reform on this issue and has poorly formed (if any) ideas about what should actually go into place. It doesn’t help that most people are controlled by fear mongering more effectively than facts, especially those that don’t know much about guns.

          Another pr9blem people have with gun control regulation is that it allows an authoritarian government to more easily defeat the populace. In every modern war, guerrillas, especially in urban areas, have the upper hand against modern militaries due to the need to project soft power and retain international support. If you think it’s never gonna happen here then you clearly haven’t been paying attention and if you’re gonna be one of those people that goes “bubut the military had bombs and jets” don’t even bother replying as you clearly haven’t been paying attention modern history and the successes across the world of resistance movements.

          And it’s all great to say that the 20,000 people a year that die from guns (mostly suicide followed by active gang members engaged in gang violence, both activities prone to causing deaths regardless of accessibility to guns, but likely reduced) are a price that’s worth it to pay but there’s no realistic way that you’re disarming the American populace, only preventing new sales. This means that there will still be a huge amount of guns available for criminals, and as we’ve seen with drugs, banning something that people desire just causes a crime-ridden black market. Not to mention the immeasurable good that they could do against a tyrannical government.

          On top of that, you can literally 3d print firearms now. It at least used to take some knowhow but now any scmuck can get into it with just a little bit of searching and a very minor investment. In that way, the cat’s out of the bag, and if the US gun market fails to supply criminals, especially organized crime, we know exactly what they’re going to do.

          The key is building up social services in impoverished areas and removing the factors that push people towards crime. Improving our mental health infrastructure and social safety nets such that we have a violent crime rate that resembles other developed nations. Reducing the needless/baseless criminalization and overpolicing of poor and minority communities to reduce the trauma of communities growing up without fathers. Getting a handle on race relations, even between different poc groups, such that gangs become an unnecessary method of association. Not just zeroing in on the scary but useful tool that is the firearm, especially as it is the only true equalizer in society. “God created man but Samuel Colt made them equal”.

          Not to mention how they allow women especially to stand up to violence they would otherwise have no chance against. Don’t give me the pepper spray and stun gun bs btw, I pity the person that thinks that will stop a large, angry man. If you’re truly interested in nonlethal means of self defense however, I believe the foaming/gel bear sprays would definitely stop an attacker, but they tend to be quite large and annoying to carry. Also, if you think armed self defense is unnecessary it’s only because you’ve never been in a situation where you wanted or tried to defend yourself but couldn’t. I don’t carry a weapon, but I’ve experienced things that make me feel like maybe I should’ve been and things would’ve gone differently.

          Sorry for the long flow of consciousness style comment and I apologize if I attacked you at all I can sometimes get heated abt this subject.

          School shootings are a miniscule issue though by the statistics. The problem is that we spectalize them with the 24 hour news cycle because it makes people angry and upset. This spectacle is also exactly the reward these murderers are seeking out. If the news was required to spend a proportionate amount of time on different subjects by how much they negatively impact your health on average (let’s say by how much they reduce the life expectancy of the average person), we should be banning cigarettes, alcohol, and added sugars long before guns. Why are we so focused on the guns? Why aren’t we focusing on reducing our ridiculous overweight and obesity rates? Because school shootings make you sad, like the WWF panda or the aspca commercial. Don’t get me wrong, they get me sad too, but our deeply damaged society is to blame, not guns.

    • GBU_28@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      3 months ago

      In general yes but this discussion is a out mass shootings.

      • PhlubbaDubba@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        3 months ago

        This discussion is about gun violence. Saying there weren’t a lot of school shootings back then is about as helpful to the root issue discussion as saying that cyberbullying wasn’t an issue before the 90s anyways.

        • GBU_28@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          3 months ago

          Almost all comments in this chain, and indeed the immediate one you replied to mention “school shooting”.

          Beyond that, schools and dangerous guns existed before 1980.

          Edit even the original meme is about a school shooting

            • GBU_28@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              5
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              3 months ago

              Of course they are, but to suggest the same variables drive a school shooting vs a midnight gas station robbery is silly

                • Anyolduser@lemmynsfw.com
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  5
                  ·
                  3 months ago

                  Because they’re different crimes with different motives committed by different people under different circumstances.

                  Literally the only things in common between the two are firearms, humans being involved, and them both taking place on the planet Earth.