The point he’s making is that the title asks what changed to make mass shootings more commons “in the last 30 years” and you answered it by blaming the difference between guns today and guns 250 years ago, so he pointed out that there was at least a 30 year period where the guns of today were available and yet the mass shooting problem of today didn’t exist (1960-1990).
That would mean that the cause of mass shootings today isn’t necessarily because we evolved beyond the musket.
Were those assault weapons as easily aquirable then as it is now?
A lot more easy as a matter of fact. All the stores stuffed with guns now were just as stuffed with them back then, if not more so, and it was easier AND faster to get them into your hands. I mean you’re casually calling a semiautomatic AR-15 an “assault weapon” because it LOOKS like a military gun. But prior to 1986 you could just go and buy a fully automatic machine gun that also FUNCTIONED like a military gun. I mean there was a point in time in American History where you could order a rifle in a paper catalogue.
“Assault weapon” doesn’t mean anything in actual weapon terminology. Regular citizens cannot acquire fully automatic firearms without tens of thousands in permits. The guns used in shootings are all semi automatic, just because it’s stylized like an M-16 doesn’t mean it’s more powerful or capable of anything beyond any other semi automatic weapon.
Yes, you could always go and buy a semiautomatic weapon from the Walmart down the road. I don’t think they changed in price except with inflation though.
The technology and accessibility have always been similar, that’s why it’s weird that the issue seems to have significantly spiked in 1999 when Columbine happened and the entire planet spent a month doing deep dive investigations into the shooter psychology.
It seems more like the change is that incel wannabe badasses realized they can have five minutes of infamy by just grabbing a gun and going to kill some random people. Considering everything else is the same.
Ah. My point was not to say that mass shootings are strictly because of advancements in firearm technology. Anyone who thinks it’s not multifactorial is a moron. But anyone who thinks the underlying technology isn’t fundamentally required for the phenomenon to occur is also a moron.
I was only responding to the fact that OP said 200 years, and just from a practical perspective 200 years ago you just couldn’t do a mass shooting. If you ask me why we didn’t have mass shootings in the 50s through 70s that’s a different question that actually gets to the point of the matter. 200 years is such a long timeframe as to be silly. Might as well ask why people didn’t send bulk emails in the 20s.
EncryptKeeper@lemmy.world 1 year ago
The point he’s making is that the title asks what changed to make mass shootings more commons “in the last 30 years” and you answered it by blaming the difference between guns today and guns 250 years ago, so he pointed out that there was at least a 30 year period where the guns of today were available and yet the mass shooting problem of today didn’t exist (1960-1990).
That would mean that the cause of mass shootings today isn’t necessarily because we evolved beyond the musket.
Hedup@lemm.ee 1 year ago
Were those assault weapons as easily aquirable then as it is now?
EncryptKeeper@lemmy.world 1 year ago
A lot more easy as a matter of fact. All the stores stuffed with guns now were just as stuffed with them back then, if not more so, and it was easier AND faster to get them into your hands. I mean you’re casually calling a semiautomatic AR-15 an “assault weapon” because it LOOKS like a military gun. But prior to 1986 you could just go and buy a fully automatic machine gun that also FUNCTIONED like a military gun. I mean there was a point in time in American History where you could order a rifle in a paper catalogue.
Amends1782@lemmy.ca 1 year ago
Was not expecting such reasonable rhetoric on Lemmy. Rare w
c0mbatbag3l@lemmy.world 1 year ago
“Assault weapon” doesn’t mean anything in actual weapon terminology. Regular citizens cannot acquire fully automatic firearms without tens of thousands in permits. The guns used in shootings are all semi automatic, just because it’s stylized like an M-16 doesn’t mean it’s more powerful or capable of anything beyond any other semi automatic weapon.
Yes, you could always go and buy a semiautomatic weapon from the Walmart down the road. I don’t think they changed in price except with inflation though.
The technology and accessibility have always been similar, that’s why it’s weird that the issue seems to have significantly spiked in 1999 when Columbine happened and the entire planet spent a month doing deep dive investigations into the shooter psychology.
It seems more like the change is that incel wannabe badasses realized they can have five minutes of infamy by just grabbing a gun and going to kill some random people. Considering everything else is the same.
kleenbhole@lemy.lol 1 year ago
Ah. My point was not to say that mass shootings are strictly because of advancements in firearm technology. Anyone who thinks it’s not multifactorial is a moron. But anyone who thinks the underlying technology isn’t fundamentally required for the phenomenon to occur is also a moron.
I was only responding to the fact that OP said 200 years, and just from a practical perspective 200 years ago you just couldn’t do a mass shooting. If you ask me why we didn’t have mass shootings in the 50s through 70s that’s a different question that actually gets to the point of the matter. 200 years is such a long timeframe as to be silly. Might as well ask why people didn’t send bulk emails in the 20s.
EncryptKeeper@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Well OP is framing the entire timeframe as 200 years but he also specifies the last 30.