Roe vs Wade / gun laws

Except that the Supreme Court just issued a ruling expanding the right to conceal carry in response to a challenge to NYC's 108 year old ban. There are no zones mentioned in the Constitution so how can they be instituted now?
I keep going back to the example of the police officer who punched a woman in the face twice at a pro abortion rally. He is running for office and was inspired to do so to fight proposed legislation aimed at banning high capacity magazines. That's not even the weapon itself that is being addressed.

In the US the issue of gun ownership is tied to the abortion debate in a way that people in the UK can't appreciate, along with the capacity to violently impose these beliefs on others even when it is not necessarily the majority view.

We're being beaten in the streets and subjected to not only political oppression but also personal violence by those in power, who have sometimes not even won the popular vote, and you ask me what I propose to do?

I didn’t saying precludes, I said resist. Forcing through a gun ban by reinterpreting the SA will take political will, and political will takes consensus that seems not to exist at the moment. If the Biden administration finds a way to legislate on guns without having first won some hearts and minds, it will cause more political strife. Some states might secede.

And I’m not sure it is inconsistent. The SA confers a positive right, so laws that breach it (however you interpret it) are unlawful laws. The constitution doesn’t seem to confer the right to abortion, so laws that deny that right (although I oppose them politically) don’t seem to be unlawful.

Pro life up until birth. After that, fuck 'em seems to be the attitude.

Re the gun thing I saw a comment on Reddit about how you now have to wait for an abortion until your kid goes to school which ok I get the point being made but it was dark as hell.

I’ve clearly said I hate guns. I’m defensive of fact-based argument and getting a proper understanding of the opposing perspectives because I don’t think the alternatives are effective.

Apologies - that was a different study. I agree - it's low. This was the source. Unfortunately you need a paid account to dig into the numbers.
www.statista.com/statistics/476461/mass-shootings-in-the-us-by-legality-of-shooters-weapons/

I think there is grand hypocrisy here.

On the one hand, the first amendment emphasises separation of church and state. Yet, the fundamentalist Christian Conservatives keep throwing the bible at certain decisions and lobbying efforts, of which they are v influential.

They claim all life is precious- unless you're alive, poor, an immigrant or of a different colour.

Death Penalty on one hand, but pro life the other.

A little far fetched maybe, but I have wondered whether there is a little bit of insidious soft Eugenics at play. I think Ben Wattenberg talked about this in his book 'The Birth Dearth'-Not enough white babies are born-so best to save them so that POC don't out number them.

They yell 'The govt should not interfere with my civil liberties!- My Body My Choice!' when they were asked to get vaccinated and put a temporary mask on- to help reduce their horrendous death toll during the pandemic, but then get their knickers in a twist when women yell "The govt should not interfere with my civil liberties- My Body My Choice'

‘1-101 car crash’

Bad driving!

In the US your lifetime odds of dying by gun assault is 1 in 221, compared to 1-7 from cancer, 1-67 from an opioid overdose, 1-101 car crash 1-1,024 drowning, 1-69,016 dog attack.

You also have a 1-93 chance of dying from suicide, of which a very large number will also be gun deaths, a method that doesn't lead much scope for changing your mind.

"over 50% more likely to be shot dead" still needs to be applied to your overall chance of being shot dead, which is still thankfully small. The study also looked specifically at handguns, which people often buy for personal protection. It was exploring the mismatch between how much safer people think guns make them versus the reality.

The study looked specifically at handguns, not all guns.

There are other solutions rather than an outright ban, though, and I think it’s better to explore them from the position of ‘nobody wants these mass school shootings to continue’ rather than running round shouting about 50% of rural Americans wanting kids to die because it almost certainly isn’t true.

One thing that might work is a system of zones - make it harder to get a gun in a city than a town, in a town than a shack in the middle of nowhere.

To be honest, that is rather the conclusion I have come to in recent times.

America is definitely one of those, as Donald Trump put it, 'shithole countries'.

‘These people don't care that little kids get murdered in their school, as long as they keep their right walk into a supermarket and pick a gun off the shelf.’

I find this reductive to the point that it’s almost offensive to me. If 50% of people in rural areas in the US don’t care that little children are murdered, maybe it’s not worth me commenting on US politics, because that must be insurmountable. Sounds like an awful place.

@achillestoes but they can if they want to. And sometimes do. That's the whole point.

‘It's clear that if the US sorted its gun laws, then less people would be killed by guns. We know this because it has been the case in countless other countries.’

The US isn’t the same as every other country. But I agree with you that passing a law to get rid of guns in the US would reduce the death toll.

You still have to pass the law via democratic norms in each state.

But all the evidence shows that with much tighter gun laws, less people die from guns.

These people don't care that little kids get murdered in their school, as long as they keep their right walk into a supermarket and pick a gun off the shelf.

‘the people at the other end wont be.’

But again, this is monstering. Nearly everyone who owns a gun in the US doesn’t murder anyone.

‘But why are we sticking up for people who are in favour of a law that can only ever lead to murder?’

Because bad arguments don’t work.

‘One child is too many.’

I agree. Still a poor argument if you want to base it on statistics. Nearly everyone who owns a gun will be fine.

‘They allow the law and instead choose to take on women despite the fact that they KNOW children are at risk.’

Sorry, this really is poor argumentation. They are prepared to accept that some people will die (I wouldn’t be. I hate guns.) That isn’t the same as wanting people to die. They might have an abhorrence of murder and lawbreaking in general, and still prefer to have a gun for self-defence.

We have to stop monstering people on the other side of arguments to us. It’s destructive.