this post was submitted on 24 Sep 2023
522 points (97.1% liked)

News

23684 readers
4144 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. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. 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
 

California cannot ban gun owners from having detachable magazines that hold more than 10 rounds, a federal judge ruled Friday.

The decision from U.S. District Judge Roger Benitez won’t take effect immediately. California Attorney General Rob Bonta, a Democrat, has already filed a notice to appeal the ruling. The ban is likely to remain in effect while the case is still pending.

This is the second time Benitez has struck down California’s law banning certain types of magazines. The first time he struck it down — way back in 2017 — an appeals court ended up reversing his decision.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Poob@lemmy.ca 128 points 1 year ago (9 children)

Magazine size laws aren't really effective at doing anything. Up in Canada you can't have a rifle magazine with more than 5 rounds. However, almost all of the magazines are full size magazines that have been modified to hold fewer rounds. All of the responsible owners leave them at 5, but with a minute or two of work you could turn most of them into full size again. We don't have mass shootings every day.

Gun violence in America is a culture issue. You're broken.

[–] mctoasterson@reddthat.com 63 points 1 year ago (1 children)

A magazine is literally just a box of certain geometry with a spring inside it. They can be 3D printed or made by hand. No government anywhere can stop the signal. Instead we need to focus on the cultural rot that made narcissists decide it was OK to assault random strangers.

[–] BackOnMyBS@lemmy.world 16 points 1 year ago

narcissists

thank you!! this country has a narcissism problem. the hyper-focus on individuality and celebrities not only encourages it, but celebrates it. lots of people look up to narcissistic psychopaths as if being a ruthless egotistical asshole is something to strive for.

i knew a guy that had one poster up, and it was of Tony Montana from Scarface. he would show it off to people as if he were unaware he was indirectly telling everyone that he was an asshole. the guy i knew looked up to a machiavellian drug dealer that easily murdered anyone that got in his way of wealth and power, despite that Tony had a horrible relationship with his wife, was paranoid, and ended up dying from his own shit behaviors.

i knew a girl with a social circle that was all about social media likes. her and her best friend went to Hawaii to take pictures to post on instagram and facebook. i mean, they spent thousands of dollars and planned their days out in Hawaii around going to scenic places so they could waste hours taking and retaking 100s of pictures to post a few of the best ones. these girls had terrible relationships characterized by antagonism and competition. they would hit on each other's boyfriends and cheat on their own, then get surprisingly upset if anyone else did a 1/10 of what they did to their so-called friends and boyfriends. it was disgusting how they treated each other. even their own individual mentality was marred by these delusions of grandiosity and entitlement that weren't rooted in rationality or care for others.

whenever i visit other countries, i'm refreshed by the humanity of people there. i think it's one of the reasons i like traveling so much. i just cannot deal with the narcissism here. it's exhausting and alienating. anyone have any tips on how to remedy these feelings i get?

[–] librechad@lemm.ee 13 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

One of the hillbillies I know have a fully automatic M14 with a 20 round magazine from the Korean War. It was a pleasure to fire that thing.

[–] PoliticalAgitator@lemm.ee 8 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Is the magazine size restrictions the only difference between the gun laws of America and Canada?

[–] ikidd@lemmy.world 22 points 1 year ago (3 children)

The most effective part of our gun laws is preventing violent offenders from obtaining a license (and maybe having a license to start with, I guess).

Beyond that, almost every other part of our laws are a ridiculous dog and pony show meant to appease some group or other in some way that's usually completely ineffective.

[–] FluorideMind@lemmy.world 10 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Exactly, it's very hard to respect the anti gun crowd when they focus on banning things that don't even matter beyond comfort or aesthetics. It's just all feel good bs that does nothing but hinder the average joe

[–] PoliticalAgitator@lemm.ee -4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Do you know why it's hard to respect the pro-gun crowd?

Because when a legal gun owner in Ulvade used a legally purchased gun to mutilate a room full of children beyond recognition and the entire world asked "What can we change to stop this from happening?", do you know what their pro-gun community replied?

"I don't know, maybe something to do with doors or mental health. All I know is that the gun laws in Texas are brilliant, if not too strict. There is nothing I would have changed and selling guns to someone with a history of rape threats and animal abuse is exactly what the founding fathers wanted".

But yeah sorry we don't know the intricacies of your little trinkets.

[–] BaldProphet@kbin.social 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

But yeah sorry we don’t know the intricacies of your little trinkets.

If you actually cared as much as you act like you do, you would educate yourself about these "little trinkets".

[–] FluorideMind@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Exactly. They act like they know everything and ignore when you try to educate them. Banning any feature of a gun isn't going to matter, nothing short of a full on ban is going to put a dent in shootings and that's just not going to happen without civil war.

[–] jeremy_sylvis@midwest.social 2 points 1 year ago

Arguably addressing root issues would have profound effect... though I tend to agree it won't happen without civil war, given the current state of partisan politics and waves vaguely at this post

[–] vivadanang@lemm.ee -5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

it's very hard to respect the anti-gun crowd? because they focus on banning things that don't matter?

like focusing on red flag laws so nutbags don't buy rifles, abusive fucks don't keep their handguns? yeah none of that matters. you fuckwit.

it's impossible to have any respect for the pro-dead-children crowd. you cretins deserve so much worse.

[–] nBodyProblem@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago (3 children)

like focusing on red flag laws so nutbags don't buy rifles, abusive fucks don't keep their handguns? yeah none of that matters. you fuckwit.

They want due process to have their personal property taken from them? Man. That’s just crazy!

[–] vivadanang@lemm.ee -5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

mass murder after mass murder after mass murder and you're just fine with things how they are.

[–] jeremy_sylvis@midwest.social 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

mass murder after mass murder

You seem to be making quite the set of assumptions.

Those of us in favor of firearm ownership do actively want change - but you might be surprised to hear we want changes which actually address underlying issues rather than nonsense about magazine capacities and scary black rifle.

[–] ApostleO@startrek.website 1 points 8 months ago

Yeah, as a leftist who likes guns for fun, survival, self defense, and theoretical political unrest... I still think it's ridiculous we don't have gun licenses in the US. Or a gun ownership registry.

Bans restrict freedom for everyone.

License and registration lets you maintain that freedom for most, but still restrict it where necessary (e.g. crime, mental health), and more easily track and punish those who misuse firearms.

[–] PoliticalAgitator@lemm.ee -4 points 1 year ago

What particular laws have been "completely ineffective"? How are you measuring that efficiency, if not by comparing to countries without them?

We get it, gun owners get salty because they're not allowed all the toys they want. Their natural state is "tantrum" from America to Canada to Australia to the UK.

But that's too bad for them. While they may decided that increased risk of people being murdered is fine because they don't think it will be their family, those countries have decided that their hurt feelings aren't as important as other people's lives.

And oh look, they're way better places to send you kids to school or walk around at night. Who'd have fucking known?

[–] Kalcifer@lemm.ee 11 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

No. Canada has a whole host of prohibitions, and restrictions. The sale and transfer of handguns was recently made illegal (source), in 2020, 1500 models of what the Canadian government deemed to be an "Assault Rifle" were banned (source), Canada has extreme restrictions on the transportation of "Restricted Firearms" (handguns are an example of this) in that, to be able to transport them, you must obtain an "Authorization to transport", to be able to carry a "Restricted", or "Prohibited" firearm, one must obtain an "Authorization to Carry" (unless, possibly, it is for wilderness protection (source)), and, as outlined in the Canadian Criminal Code, and the Firearms Act, there are also many restrictions on the general transport, handling, storage, display, and transfer of firearms. Not to mention that in addition to all of this, as outlined in the Firearms Act, every firearm owner must be licensed for the use of "non-restricted" firearms (Possession and Acquisition License, PAL), and "restricted" firearms (Restricted Possession and Acquisition License, RPAL), respectively. The acquisition of each of these licenses requires a 1 day course, the successful passing of both a practical, and written exam, and a background check performed by the RCMP. After filling out, and submitting one's application, the prospective firearm owner's application, as mandated by legislation, will sit idle with the RCMP for a 28-day cooldown period. Only after that cooldown period has completed will they begin to process one's application, which can then take much longer depending on the speed of the government at any given time.

I can provide no guarantee that this list is exhaustive.

[–] Kalcifer@lemm.ee 7 points 1 year ago

In addition to this, there is no limitation on the magazine size for rimfire longuns in Canada.

[source] With some exceptions, there is no limit to the magazine capacity for:

  • semi-automatic, rim-fire long guns
  • other long guns that are not semi-automatics
[–] jeremy_sylvis@midwest.social 4 points 1 year ago

It's less a culture issue and more a safety nets issue - one we need to do much to improve upon.

[–] drewisawesome14@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (3 children)

We really could solve so many issues if we just did the basics. Stronger background checks, better gun storage laws, provide basic firearm education (maybe even make it mandatory).

I’m pro gun. But think about the people you know who should never own one. That’s what we should be focusing on. Weeding out irresponsible gun owners and harsher punishments for those that ignore the laws.

Every pro gunner likes to use murder as a comparison against gun laws, “well murder is illegal, but people still do it!” Yeah, but can you imagine how high murder rates would skyrocket if they were legal? You’re not going to stop all gun deaths, but we could do a shit ton to at least minimize them the best we can.

It’s so frustrating because all we need to do is implement common sense gun restrictions to keep them out of the wrong hands, but nooooo. That takes too much brain power for half of the US, apparently.

[–] jeremy_sylvis@midwest.social 3 points 1 year ago

Stronger background checks, better gun storage laws, provide basic firearm education (maybe even make it mandatory).

I'd love to see your source for such positions, especially regarding the magnitude of improvement expected and the justification for such.

We already have extensive background checks for nearly every firearm purchase. I've yet to see support for the notion that any meaningful percentage of firearm violence is committed by those who legally purchased a firearm but somehow bypassed a background check.

Similarly, I've yet to see any support for the notion that legally requiring safe storage - constitutional violation concerns aside - would make any meaningful improvement. This, at least, one could do much to promote without adding restrictions - I've yet to see any blue team support for, say, subsiding safes.

And similarly, there's no blue team support for subsided, equitable, shall-issue training and licensing - and a lack of indication it would make a difference.

I'm pro gun. But think about the people you know who should never own one. That’s what we should be focusing on. Weeding out irresponsible gun owners and harsher punishments for those that ignore the laws.

Oh? Who are those people? How would you objectively identify such?

Every pro gunner likes to use murder as a comparison against gun laws, “well murder is illegal, but people still do it!” Yeah, but can you imagine how high murder rates would skyrocket if they were legal? You’re not going to stop all gun deaths, but we could do a shit ton to at least minimize them the best we can.

Ironically, you highlight the reason such a highlight is raised - you do nothing at all about the underlying issue (violence and the pressures for it) and, instead, focus only on the fact firearms are a tool used; tacking on more restrictions which create additional burden for those already doing nothing wrong yet are unlikely to meaningfully impact the crime is absurd. You ignore that the current laws and proposed laws continue to ignore the problems.

It’s so frustrating because all we need to do is implement common sense gun restrictions to keep them out of the wrong hands, but nooooo. That takes too much brain power for half of the US, apparently.

"Common sense" is such a laughably disingenuous phase here. It implies the solutions are obvious and intuitive yet the solutions proposed do nothing for the issue at all beyond setting the stage for fire and fury when such measures are rightly resisted.

You are right that there are a few simple things we can do to meaningfully impact things... but you might be surprised as to what they are.

[–] Poob@lemmy.ca -1 points 1 year ago

I agree with all of this. I think almost all of Canada's gun control laws are sensible. We have sensible laws about transport, storage, safety training, and other things. Magazine size and banning weapons that look scary is not effective though.

[–] KillAllPoorPeople@lemmy.world -3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Gun deaths in Canada isn't exactly in a good place, it's just way better than the US.

[–] kent_eh@lemmy.ca -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Gun deaths in Canada isn't exactly in a good place, it's just way better than the US.

It's also mostly a problem caused by guns smuggled in from the US, where it's far too easy for people with bad intentions to get guns.

[–] CoderKat@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

Yeah, 85% of traceable guns used for crime came from the US. Our asshole neighbours refusal to get their shit together is killing Canadians because they consider their right to kill black people knocking at their door to outweigh the good of everyone else.

And then if we criticize them, they'll tell us to mind our own business, as if it's a harmless hobby that doesn't hurt anyone else.

Yeah, I know, I'm being a little over the top in this comment, but all I can do is air frustrations. Guns are like every other issue conservatives care about. You'll never change their mind. The US is too many school shootings in to admit they have a problem.

[–] jeremy_sylvis@midwest.social 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Hold up. Canada's failure to manage its borders is our issue? This, even aside from how you apparently only care that crime was committed with those darn American handguns rather than that crime was committed. Aren't you supposed to be the country doing better?

Also, what's this about right to kill black people? Is this more Works Cited: Crack Pipe nonsense?

The US is too many school shootings in to admit they have a problem.

When either party is willing to actually address underlying issues, feel free to revisit that high horse.

[–] FluorideMind@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Lmao are you really shifting blame from the Canadian criminal to the American gun? You really believe the criminal wouldn't have committed the crime without a gun? Like above nothing short of a total ban will impact crime, and that's not going to happen for a few reasons. We are all frustrated from crazies killing people but the solution isn't in the guns, we need to treat the person.

Also you seem a bit brain washed thinking gun owners just want to kill black people. Maybe you should think hard about that line and who gains from you believing that.