222
Mom of 6-year-old who shot his teacher sentenced to 2 years in prison in state case
(abcnews.go.com)
this post was submitted on 15 Dec 2023
222 points (99.1% liked)
News
25312 readers
3908 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I, from the UK, once had a 'conversation' about gun control with an American on Reddit. What brought this about was the day before a 9 year old girl was killed by a stray bullet from a drive-by. One moment she was in her bedroom doing some homework, and the next she was dead.
After a lot of back and forth with him getting more flummoxed and aggressive he then said something like "If she was outside playing like a normal kid then she wouldn't have been killed."
Yep, he blamed her.
That was the time I realised it was a waste of everything talking about it.
people who argue that their right to guns is more important than a persons right to life is inherently moronic, and shouldn't be listened to.
One thing I've learned is that, if you write a comment with reasonable
balance of views and still get attacks, the posters are people without proper trainings on critical debates.
In case of the gun ban, it's even worse because most people never lived in the rest of the world.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_firearm-related_death_rate
Are guns legal in: El Salvador, Venezuela, Eswatini, Jamaica, Honduras, Guatemala, Brazil, and Columbia?
All of those nations have higher firearm death rates than the US.
If guns are illegal in any of the nations with higher firearm death rates than the US, then can you acknowledge that banning guns is not the only issue? Maybe culture has something to do with it?
Did you not read the part where they said that dumb Americans can shut up and keep their idiocacy to themselves?
Like honestly, this is the DUMBEST fucking argument I've ever heard.
Multiple factors contribute to the both the rate and severity of violent crime, congratulations Einstein! Now answer me this, when multiple factors contribute to something happening, and you want to stop that something from happening, do you a) sit around and do nothing and say it's impossible to address in any way shape or form cause the solution requires addressing multiple factors, or do you b) try and address all the factors contributing to it, starting with the easiest and most obvious ones?
Like Jesus Christ, think with your fucking brain, not the lead dust poisoning it.
Calm down and people might take you seriously.
Say something that's not a brain dead NRA argument if you want people to not insult your intelligence.
Tell us again how when multiple factors contribute to a problem that means you can't address any of them.
That was your argument right?
Where did I ever suggest that? You can quote me so there's no ambiguity.
Or just admit you're making up bullshit that's easier to argue against because you can't address what I'm actually saying.
Oh I'm sorry, your arguing that El Salvador and the US have comparable levels of law enforcement and border control?
Oh I'm so sorry I mistook your dumbass argument that has no merit for a different dumbass argument that has no merit.
Lol, there you go doing it again.
I'm arguing the exact opposite of that. You should really brush up on your reading comprehension. Try to address what's being said instead of playing leapfrog with yourself like someone who is chronically reddit-brained.
Your argument is that gun control is not the answer to reducing gun crime, because, El Salvador bans guns and has a high rate of gun crime.
It's a dumbass argument and we're all waiting for you to explain how it's not.
Okay. Keep replacing my arguments with ones that are easier for you to argue against.
I don't think you're capable of doing anything more.
Go ahead and explain what you meant then. You can't gaslight us when your words are literally sitting there three comments up.
Here you go. Right here. Front-and-center. If you replace these exact words with anything else, then you are replacing my argument with something that's easier for you to argue against.
Let's see if you can avoid doing it for the 3rd time in a row.
Edit: I gotta go now, but it's painfully obvious that you "can't acknowledge that banning guns is not the only issue" because you think it is the only issue. This is why you have to replace my argument with something that's easier to argue against. You know I'm right, but afraid to admit it.
None of what you've quoted matters as the entire start of that comment was so flawed. Your argument has no ground to stand on, is clearly being made in bad faith, why should any of us give it any respect?
Thanks for confirming my edit. Peace.
Culture being a factor in violent crime is neither here nor there. That's a nonsense whataboutism argument in this context.
Yes, other factors besides gun ownership also increase the rate and severity of violent crime, but so does gun ownership.
Guns are legal in all those countries besides Venezuela. Cos guns are legal in most of the world. It's just they are generally controlled. And Venezuela is on the verge on collapse anyway. I don't think this is the slam dunk argument you think it is.
Then why doesn't most of the world have a firearm homicide rate comparable to that of the US?
Literally suggested a reason for that with my very next sentence.
So you don't think guns should be banned?
You're not arguing in good faith here. I've answered you're initial, idiotic, comment. I've answered your second, idiotic, comment that was highly selective in what it quoted of me as if it was trying to "gotcha" me. And now this horseshit? I've already alluded to how most of the rest of the world does it, I suggest you go read up on it rather than trying to push your agenda on me.
You think guns should be banned, tried to argue that it's just 'gun control' that's the issue, then when pressed on it you retreat and resort to petty insults.
I accept your unconditional surrender.
I have not once stated my position on the issue. Wouldn't call what I said a petty insult either, more a statement of fact about your idiotic comments, but if you're thin skinned/wrong I can see how they could be interpreted that way. Stop trying to gotcha me, you're not very good at it, and it's just making you look dumber. The arrogance in your final comment says a hell of a lot about your character too, and like the rest of your comments here, it's not saying much good.
Okay, bud.
I can tell you're in the right because you're just insulting me without presenting a valid rebuttal.
I'm right cos I corrected your idiotic comment. You keep trying to goad me into this debate, and it's not gonna work. I corrected you. That's it. I have no desire to argue the issue with you, and that's been cemented in my mind given how badly you've tried to provoke a reaction out of me. Take the L and fuck off.
Ok.
You might want to take a break from lemmy. It doesn't seem like you're engaging in a healthy manner.
You might want to give your two brain cells a break, they're obviously exhausted from competing for third place... Please, me not engaging in a healthy manner? Your comments here could be used as a couple of examples of various mental disorders in the dsm-v.
I rest my case.
What case? That you're unintelligent? Cos you settled that with your initial comment.
This seems to apply to ya'll.