Contagion in Mass Killings and School Shootings (2015) • Hacker News Board

Re: Contagion in Mass Killings and School Shootings (2015)

#121

Post by jfnixon » Mon, Aug 05, 2019, 7:20 AM UTC

tempguy9999 wrote: post #84

mgkimsal wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"so long as they could pay for it" what if they can't pay for it? are gun manufacturers now violating the "equal protection" clause? they're denying people the ability to exercise a constitutional amendment simply based on their ability to pay.

Currently it doesn't matter whether they can pay for it or not as legally they can't have it (gov't tyranny?) So let's ignore the cost; in principle, for defence against an out of control government for which guns are needed, are USAians who are pro gun also pro the idea private citizens owning serious artillery, explosives, tanks etc?

It is legal to own tanks and flame throwers now.

Re: Contagion in Mass Killings and School Shootings (2015)

#122

Post by Juliate » Mon, Aug 05, 2019, 7:54 AM UTC

tomatotomato37 wrote: post #95

Juliate wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right. So, indeed, compare USA's violence score with: * those of the countries where the USA have put their own violent influence to steer benefits back to them (Central & South America). * or those where another white supremacist ideology has been prevalent and is being actively fought against (South Africa). But, surely, don't compare with countries that would be good reference to compare against (aka, friends with…

This is a false equivalence; The foreign policy of the state has nothing to do with the levels of violence between its citizens.

The point was not comparing foreign policy, but in-society violence. Foreign policy here is what triggered instability and in-society violence.

Re: Contagion in Mass Killings and School Shootings (2015)

#123

Post by XorNot » Mon, Aug 05, 2019, 5:02 PM UTC

cheez wrote: post #109

XorNot wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The US is/was not the local government in Afgahnistan, Iraq or Vietnam. Nor has it ever had a clear definition of what "victory" actually looks like in those places (nor any policy-level understanding or interest in the local culture and political dynamics that might enable it to develop one). But it's worth noting that no victory was achieved by the insurgent forces that ever lasted in any of those places: the US, s…

Well, ok. Bombing the shit out of everyone is a possibility but would lose major political points. No allies left after that move. I suppose the closest analogy is Syria but even there, there is so much proxy war going on that it's impossible to discern the reality of the situation. Bottom line is that it is in the best interest of the political elite to avoid angering a non trivial portion of an armed population. Th…

"Local SWAT engaged in a firefight with an armed extremist group today..."

You seem to be building a lot of assumptions into "the government is tyrannical but don't worry everyone will definitely support me when I start shooting at cops because that's how that works.

Re: Contagion in Mass Killings and School Shootings (2015)

#124

Post by mathgeek » Mon, Aug 05, 2019, 5:53 PM UTC

foolrush wrote: post #101

mathgeek wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

News that is free to consume is the same as any other free product: the reader/viewer is the product.

Many countries with a tremendous backbone in journalistic research have done pretty well using public funded news. The BBC and it’s ilk was a beacon for years. The trope is exhausting.

Funded via public revenue isn’t the same as ad-supported. The former is still paid for by the group that many consumers are a part of. It’s only “free” in the manner that a public road is “free”.

Re: Contagion in Mass Killings and School Shootings (2015)

#125

Post by cheez » Mon, Aug 05, 2019, 10:08 PM UTC

XorNot wrote: post #123

cheez wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, ok. Bombing the shit out of everyone is a possibility but would lose major political points. No allies left after that move. I suppose the closest analogy is Syria but even there, there is so much proxy war going on that it's impossible to discern the reality of the situation. Bottom line is that it is in the best interest of the political elite to avoid angering a non trivial portion of an armed population. Th…

"Local SWAT engaged in a firefight with an armed extremist group today..." You seem to be building a lot of assumptions into "the government is tyrannical but don't worry everyone will definitely support me when I start shooting at cops because that's how that works.

And you build in the same assumptions. For now, there is no such worry.