Can’t imagine what could possibly go wrong with this idea.

  • shalafi@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    39
    ·
    edit-2
    2 days ago

    Which is what? Details please. Your solution must be legal and practical. Go.

    EDIT: As I figured. Angry children will no real policy ideas, no real laws to be enacted, totally ignorant of how Constitutional amendments work.

    I want REAL fucking ideas, real HELP!

    Lemmy: “no you”

    If you’re not adult enough to comment, refrain.

    • Auli@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 days ago

      Well how about stricter gun laws. Maybe about back program to get some iff the street. I mean you are the only country who has this problem at this scale so thinking there is nothing you could do is stupid.

    • (des)mosthenes@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      36
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      4 days ago

      get some of the guns off the streets; particularly automatics and semi autos. those didn’t exist for maybe the first quarter to half of the history of the country. feels like every other civilized country seems not to have these problems like we do.

      • Carl@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 days ago

        Health care provided via taxes, cheaper therapy, better gun laws. Nah, it is the United States, they don’t need that.

      • arrow74@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        Unfortunately that’s not going to be easy. It’s basically political suicide for any party that tries, but additionally would require reworking the constitution. Due to the document’s flaws you would need 2/3rds of states or 2/3rds of Congress.

        Functionally it’s impossible due both to the average American voter and the constitution.

        • Auli@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 days ago

          I mean if Trump has shown anything it’s you don’t need that. Just for it.

          • arrow74@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            2 days ago

            He’s shown the opposite. He can do what he wants because his party controls both Congress and the Supreme Court. You’d have to reverse that entirely. Basically if you control all three branches of government you can do what you want, but you also need all 3 to make reforms too.

            Flipping the Supreme Court alone could take decades

      • chunes@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 days ago

        Trump has shown us that we can, in fact, send federal agents to enforce laws (and then some) without so much as a whimper. So the solution is obviously to confiscate the guns.

          • PKscope@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            7
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            2 days ago

            Not. Fucking. One.

            All these “Don’t step on snek” motherfuckers are awfully quiet lately. Almost like its the same group of people 🤔

            • shalafi@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              2 days ago

              I’m loud as fuck around here. Tell me what to do with my guns. Chapter and verse, spell it out. I’ll fucking wait while you compose your answer. Meanwhile, I’ll order more ammo. Thanks for reminding me! About out of .22LR and .45! Going to practice some more at camp tomorrow. (Like I’m not already practiced, but whatever, practice makes perfect.)

      • shalafi@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        11
        ·
        3 days ago

        You must enact this plan without running afoul of the 2nd Amendment. It exists and courts have upheld it to mean a personal right to gun ownership.

        Doesn’t matter if you like it. Doesn’t matter if I like it. The 2nd Amendment is a fact. The court rulings are a fact.

        So? Got a realistic plan?

        • chunes@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          14
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          3 days ago

          Your god king has already ignored the constitution countless times in the past 9 months. The second amendment means nothing, all thanks to him.

          • arrow74@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 days ago

            That’s because Republicans have stacked the Supreme Court in their favor. They also control the means to remove the president.

            Basically everything that has empowered Trump also works to empower true gun reform from ever occurring.

            Any president that tried would not get it through congress. If they tried illegally they would be removed. You might wonder why, and the simple answer is congress. Republicans will not vote for total gun restrictions, that’s part of their brand. Many democrats also can’t vote for it if they want to retain their seats. A good example is the state of Georgia, it’s 2 senators are currently democrats, but the state had leaned heavily republican form years. They barely held their seats. Georgia is also extremely pro-gun and has more relaxed laws than even Florida. If these senators voted for sweeping bans they will lose their seats next cycle. That’s not a question but a garuntee. They would likely be promptly replaced.

            This current political situation would take decades to change.

          • shalafi@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            2 days ago

            We, uh, kinda know all that. Preaching to the choir?

            So anyway, how about answering the question as to how me and my guns navigate this situation?

        • Mongostein@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          14
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          3 days ago

          A new constitution. Your government doesn’t give a shit about it, so make a new one.

          • arrow74@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            2 days ago

            Unfortunately that could only happen by a full dissolution of the government by force or 2/3rds of states agreeing to a constitutional convention followed by the ratification proccess.

            Option 1 is likely a brutal, bloody, and global war. Option two probably will never happen. It’s a pretty broken system

          • boonhet@sopuli.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            3 days ago

            That involves first shooting the 2nd amendment folk so you still need to have guns though?

            • Mongostein@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              7
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              3 days ago

              Wow Americans love violence so much you can literally not think of another way, huh?

              • boonhet@sopuli.xyz
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                3 days ago

                I’m not American.

                There are tens of millions of rabid Trump supporters with guns. They are not willing to compromise on any single issue and if you disagree with the emperor, that’s treason.

                How exactly are you going to win their hearts and minds while being a wanted terrorist (which you will be declared as, since being against fascism is now officially terrorism)?

                • shalafi@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  2 days ago

                  Some of these comments blow me away. Guess I’m old and understand history. Which sucks cause I can’t be happy and ignorant.

                  Trump’s memo making me a terrorist for opposing, <checks list>, about everything he’s doing is the scariest thing I’ve seen in American history.

                  Fuck me, I can’t wear certain clothes or fly certain flags without inviting a firefight. And yes, I’ll defend myself. But fuck me, I can’t express certain opinions without risking my life? Fascism is here, now, today.

              • shalafi@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                2 days ago

                You are a child, or ignorant of history, if you don’t see how this all goes down. Yes, mass violence is coming. Give it a few years, not happening tomorrow or next year, but once Trump’s lawlessness and economy hits bottom, people will fucking riot.

                We’re not a year in and troops are on the streets of 3 major cities. The administration is tightening the noose while Trump descends deeper and deeper into dementia. Did you see the Secretary of War and the President address 800 combat generals and admirals yesterday? Called in from all over the planet? Did you hear the words spoken?!

                Again to history, the planet is tuning up for WWIII. Study WWII history. I did two years of AP European History, I get it, I see it, violence is coming.

        • iegod@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          2 days ago

          You know, it could be changed. It won’t, because you weaklings love guns more than children’s lives. But it could.

          • shalafi@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            2 days ago

            Please, do tell us what you know on changing a constitutional amendment. Spell it out, with details. What must happen?

            • iegod@lemmy.zip
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              2 days ago

              I’m not American, I’m not going to solve anything for you. My only point is that it is possible. If you want to bury your head in the sand because it’s hard it only further highlights the lack of will. “We’ve done nothing and we’re all out of ideas.”

              • Auli@lemmy.ca
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                2 days ago

                It’s the left their right fights for stuff constantly and their left us ahh it’s to hard. And they wonder why they are where they are right now.

              • arrow74@lemmy.zip
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                2 days ago

                This is a fundamental misunderstanding of the American system of government. Unfortunately due to the flaws in our constitution it’s functionally impossible.

                You’d have to get the majority of Americans to support reform. Which will be hard, but not impossible. Now you can try to make it a law. If the Supreme Court rejects that law based on the constitution then you have to wait. The movement would have to continue for decades waiting for Supreme Court justices to die or retire until newly appointed judges that support the law are appointed. This is a long time for a movement to sustain power. Alternatively you can have 2/3rds of congress or 2/3rds of states make an amendment to the constitution. That would be nearly impossible.

                This system is actually what makes Trump so dangerous right now. He basically controls Congress and the Supreme Court giving him a blank check to violate the law.

                Talk about a flawed system

                • Auli@lemmy.ca
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  2 days ago

                  I bet if the rich children where dying it would be changed pretty dam quick.

        • (des)mosthenes@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          3 days ago

          trump and by proxy his supporters, cherry pick laws (much like many religious folk do with their biblical teachings) and those who enforce them, openly muses and acts on disobeying long standing, precedented law. congress and the supreme court have abdicated any semblance of independence to the culture cult. for example: trump is trying to end birthright citizenship.

          all those second amendment defenders cry foul of any changes to it in the name of protection from tyrannical government, yet tyrannical government is here and no one bats an eye.

          history is repeating itself, especially when you’re following nazi playbooks. How Hitler Dismantled a Democracy in 53 Dayshttps://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2025/01/hitler-germany-constitution-authoritarianism/681233/

          there is absolutely nothing normal about what’s going on and yet trigger fingers stand idly by as rome burns

          • shalafi@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            2 days ago

            Tell me what you would have me do with my guns. I can arm the entire block, if they weren’t already. Young and old, white and black, middle class and poor, gun in every house, and usually several. I know because I know my neighbors.

            What exactly should the little old black lady across the street do with her pistols? Name it. SPEAK OUT.

            I have one life to defend my legal, brown, immigrant wife. And I have two small children I will leave without a father.

            Whatever you tell me to do, it better fucking count for something. I am listening and more than ready. Go.

    • ℍ𝕂-𝟞𝟝@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      3 days ago

      Let more children die. That’s legal and practical.

      Otherwise you’d have to have legislators do their jobs and make laws.

      • shalafi@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        2 days ago

        Congress can’t make a law that overturns a Constitutional amendment. Doesn’t matter if I like it. Doesn’t matter if you like it. The 2A exists and the courts have upheld it to mean the right to personal gun ownership. You can pick away at it, with minimal success, but what are you actually doing?

        Let more children die.

        The “high score” for school shootings was Virginia Tech. Dude got the vast majority of his kills with a .22 pistol. Were you aiming to ban those? Or were you aiming for AR-15s, which account for <2% of all gun deaths? If you’re not talking about banning pistols, you’ve kinda failed right out the gate. Funny how no one talks that talk. What exactly is your policy and how do you aim to enforce it? I’m listening, because I also want this to end.

        If you want to trash the 2A, I’m listening, but first you have to tell me you understand what it takes to change the Constitution and how you aim to accomplish that. Easy, right? Go.

        So. Again. Practical and legal? Spell it out.

        • Auli@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 days ago

          I mean do an amendment. You treat it like it is written in stone but do you know what the amendments are! They are changes.

        • ℍ𝕂-𝟞𝟝@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          2 days ago

          Laws are made up, and the people you elect can change them. Don’t tell me that if 100% of the people in the US agreed on something, you couldn’t make it happen. The whole creation of your country was illegal by royal laws and that never seemed to stop anyone.

          The people you elect are also responsible for finding experts, hiring them, listening to them, and fixing the problem.

          So again, my solution is, let more children die. You have to look upwards and to your side for any better solution. Not my job, in my country we had like 2 school shootings in total. It’s barely yours. Wouldn’t be if it was getting done. When you decide it’s yours, get more people on board and demand accountability.

          • arrow74@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 days ago

            Right that’s the issue. Only 56% support stricter gun laws, but that could mean anything from background checks to semiautomatic weapons bans. However that 56% is not evenly spread. “Blue” states will have higher support and “Red” states typically have lower support. The issue is a state like California that has the highest population gets the same representation in the Senate as the smallest state Wyoming. Both California Senators can support a ban and both Wyoming senators can not support a ban. So just like that a state of 300,000 people negates a state with 40 million people. That’s a big flaw in the Senate.

            But even with 80% support the Supreme Court could strike it down. Meaning either 2/3rds of congress or 2/3rds of states have to support changing the constitution. But if that 80% isn’t evenly distributed then senators from smaller states could block the whole thing.

            It’s a terrible system that fights progress