• HelixDab2@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    9 months ago

    Let’s ask a similar question: what measures to oppose illegitimate voting would have stopped Trump from being elected in 2016?

    Wait a second though, wouldn’t denying the right to vote to a wide swatch of people be unconstitutional? Sure, if you want to prevent certain terrible people from being elected and the only tool you’re trying to use is regulating voting, then you’re going to have to prevent people with certain ideological views from voting. But wouldn’t that go against the core principles of the US constitution…?

    So what would have worked, if you don’t want to touch voting rights, or eliminate civil rights regarding speech and press?

    That’s a bit harder, isn’t it?

    So, let’s try this again: if you want to prevent gun violence, what would work that doesn’t infringe on constitutionally guaranteed civil rights?

    (And a note here: I did not and will not vote for Trump, any MAGA supporter, any christian nationalist, or any politician that supports gov’t censorship of any kind for any reason. I’m deeply disappointed that, whatever other social and economic disagreements I have with traditional conservatives, we can’t even agree that civil rights should be absolute.)

    • Bongo_Stryker@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      9 months ago

      My first impulse was to answer “education,” but people are willful. So probably not even that.

        • Bongo_Stryker@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          8 months ago

          Yes, but what about the willfulness part? How to account for the outpouring of opposition to education for things like evolution, critical race theory, sex education, 1619 project, etc.?

          Up in Canada, people were manipulated into blocking the streets in protest of SOGI 123, which isn’t even a curriculum, just resources to help create safer school environments. The recent event in Oklahoma resulting in a 16 year old’s death shows such resources are necessary, but someone is funding efforts to put a stop to them.

          So yeah, education does a pretty good job of reducing violence, but what’s the solution when education itself is under attack?

          • Neuromancer@lemm.eeOPM
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            8 months ago

            1619 has serious errors in it. Teaching people lies isn’t education.

            Education is teaching people facts and how to think.

            People need to be willing to support their schools

            • Bongo_Stryker@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              8 months ago

              Well that’s what you have been told, and here you are repeating it. As with evolution, sex education and the other examples, someone benefits from the mischaracterization and opposition to information being presented. They come up with ridiculous sounding bullshit and rely on others to repeat that bullshit. I can’t speak directly to the 1619 project, I don’t know much about it. I only know that some of the people in my social circles that got all worked up about it are people I consider dumber than ditch water.

              We are talking about education as a means of reducing or preventing gun violence - the topic you started. It’s my contention that as soon as you introduce an educational program aimed at reducing gun violence, someone is going to come along and say something like: “these dang freedom-hating libruls claim law-abiding responsible hunters are a bunch of violent psycho murders! They’re only tryin to put food on the table for their families. We must stop these communists fixin to take away our guns!”