• kestrel7_7@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    8 hours ago

    They just usually say “sensible gun reform”, and, like, everyone agrees with that

    I don’t mean to be disrespectful, but you are deeply out of touch with American gun owners if you think “everyone agrees with” “sensible gun reform.” Lots of gun owners vote purely to maintain the same level of access to guns we have now. They call it voting “straight 2A” and they will never vote for any Democrat because they perceive them as “gun grabbers” who are negotiating in bad faith.

    America has so many guns that to do anything about it we need to talk about a serious cultural transformation on a level with “Japan banning people from carrying swords in public” paired with the kind of mutual, transparent disarmament that happens in countries after a civil war. “Sensible gun reform” is an interesting idea because it simultaneously doesn’t go nearly far enough and is also considered way too extreme by many gun owners.

    • webadict@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      4 hours ago

      Fair. I do still think that everyone agrees with that because while these people don’t want anyone to touch any rights, they’ll ostensibly agree that “some people” shouldn’t have guns, whether that’s criminals or “criminals” or what have you.

      So, in a way, I do think even 2A people agree, they just don’t think that it is either possible (“criminals will just ignore the law” like you can just find guns wherever) or that it’s the intention behind gun control (going after political dissidents).

      My statement was more that the gun control that Democrats propose is basically nothing, and that it’s just a fucking wedge issue that also happens to consistently make gun manufacturers money. Are Dems supposed to lie and say letting teachers have guns solves gun violence in schools to appease these fuckers? Like, what the fuck are we talking about here?