So, you’re saying I should try to ban every single restaurant and store from selling vegetables and fruits and spices because I’m allergic to plants and people have almost killed me by not taking it seriously at all? That’s the worst analogy ever.
You know what we say when we get bucked off a horse? Get back on. Control the fear, don’t let the fear control you. I’ve almost died many different ways, and I learn from it and don’t let the fear control me.
I especially don’t go out trying to dictate laws that will affect 325 million people without actually understanding what I’m talking about. This kid and people who support him are making a complete and utter mockery of the anti-gun stance by not knowing the first thing about guns, or the laws that are already on the book.
Being almost killed doesn’t make someone a good advocate for a thing. 325 million people have every right to criticize someone who knows nothing about the thing he’s trying to ban. He can certainly talk all he wants, but we all have the right to tell him how and why he’s wrong and shouldn’t be dictating more useless laws on everyone else.
Some of what you say I can see your point of view, but the way many people are dealing with this is very distasteful. The people bashing traumatised 17 year olds online are doing nothing but displaying how the world has become viscous, toxic, and immoral with only concern for political and financial gain. We’re all entitled to our opinions when they do not hurt others, whether anti gun control views are hurtful to others is still up for debate so I won’t be hypocritical and in turn bash you for your opinions. But if you agree with or participate in the harmful jokes towards minors, which the one above is skirting on this, then I absolutely will defend these kids regardless of their politics because violence of any type should not be used to prove points, especially considering it does nothing but prove there’s no actual point to be made.
I don’t see any harmful jokes in this thread, nor do I agree with harmful jokes. People should focus on facts and evidence, not attacking someone.
I live in an area that has very strict gun laws, and very high crime rates. Those criminals are not using legally gained guns, most of the time it’s a felon with a firearm. In the past 10 years, an average of around 8 children (18 and under) per year died in school shootings. More children are killed riding the school bus per year, yet the media makes school shootings seem like an epidemic, when it’s not.
They are driving fear needlessly into people. Should we have precautions and safeguards? Of course. We protect government officials with firearms, we protect banks and courthouses and many other buildings with firearms, yet we don’t protect our own children.
Around 400 children every year are shot in gang related drive by shootings just in Los Angeles alone, by illegal firearms. There is no law that is going to stop that. The laws that are in place that should have stopped the Parkland shooter failed because law enforcement didn’t do their job, on many occasions. They were warned, multiple times prior to the shooting, and during the shooting, they stood outside the building and did nothing while children were killed.
Marching to ban firearms from citizens is not going to stop the law enforcement from failing again. Those people who failed at doing their job must be held accountable above all else, the corruption within the district needs to be addressed and put into the open and destroyed. Focusing on guns will help no one. People need to stop looking at the tool, and look at how to fix the actual root of the problems.
For crime in general, this means working within the communities, going after corruption in the government, in the school districts, fixing the education system, helping people stay out of poverty. Poverty and education are key factors in solving crime, but also population density, diversity of culture, neighboring countries, and the ability to trust law enforcement. These are huge problems, and when people focus on the tool, it’s like they’re too busy looking at a mole on someone’s leg while they bleed out of a massive wound in their chest.
And when people not only focus on the tool, but obviously know nothing of what they’re talking about, it makes it worse. It’s like someone claiming that if a woman gets pregnant from being raped, she wasn’t really raped because they think women can only conceive if they enjoyed it. It’s a blatant and dangerous form of ignorance, where they don’t care that they know nothing, they’re going to try to push for more laws against things they know nothing about, and that is a serious problem.
It’s not right when either side goes for cheap shots, insults, ad hominems, etc. People should stick to the facts, especially when it comes to dictating a law that will affect hundreds of millions of innocent people. They shouldn’t spread fear, they are causing little kids to be terrified of something they are statistically probably never going to experience. Life is dangerous, anything can kill us, why should children be made to fear something like this? Why should someone who experienced something traumatic be considered an expert on it?
@writetheworldyours What specifically have I said that was abusive to the victims? You’re the one who said what I posted warranted an “immediate unfollow”. This post was not a “harmful joke”, it was a picture of a fucking headline and an expression of my exasperation with this person trying to punish law-abiding companies for existing. There was literally nothing abusive here.