New Mexico Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham has issued an emergency public health order temporarily suspending the right to carry firearms in public across Albuquerque and surrounding Bernalillo County.

  • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    63
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Targeting legal gun owners won’t stop criminals from carrying firearms.

    I hate this talking point. You could say that about practically any law. “Targeting legal car owners won’t stop criminals from drunk driving” or even “targeting factories won’t stop some of them from criminally polluting.” That’s not the point. The point is to add charges once they’re caught to maximize their sentence.

    • SupraMario@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      33
      ·
      1 year ago

      It’s already illegal to carry a firearm and commit a crime…you wanting to make it double illegal? No this talking point is exactly that, a spot on assessment that laws like this only attack the law abiding gun owners. That’s exactly what they’re designed for, to create more criminals.

      • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        22
        ·
        1 year ago

        Do you really not understand the concept behind adding charges to extend sentences? It’s why Trump has been indicted so many times.

        • sudo22@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          1 year ago

          This is great if you assume all gun carriers are going to commit a crime with their gun.

          The problem is this order can be used to attack people who are otherwise doing nothing wrong, who might be caring explicitly because they want to protect themselves from the crime wave this order is trying to address.

            • sudo22@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              8
              ·
              1 year ago

              The answer to the drug abuse epidemic isn’t more drugs either. But banning drugs didn’t do anything to help communities nor will banning guns.

                • sudo22@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  1 year ago

                  Social safety nets.

                  Things like: Universal health care, stronger worker protections, better welfare support, better maternal/paternal assistance.

                  People making enough money to support themselves, aren’t in constant danger of layoffs just to boost profits, can access physical and mental healthcare cheaply, aren’t financially ruined because they have a baby and new a few months off work, and aren’t in danger of losing everything over an emergency room visit aren’t out committing violent crimes.

                  Focusing on “gun” violence ignores the root cause of violent crimes regardless of the weapon of choice.

                  • SatansMaggotyCumFart@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    Every other country has problems too.

                    That’s just pointing to another problem and hoping people get distracted by it and not pay attention to the guns.

      • r_wraith@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        13
        ·
        1 year ago

        Why do you think there are laws prohibiting the possession of certain items or substances at all? I mean, why should a law abiding citizen owning a bomb, a sample of smallpox virus or a few pounds of heroin be a problem? Crimnals will get them anyhow and if they use them, it`s already illegal. Why is driving while intoxicated illegal? Wouldn’t it be sufficient if only causing an accident while drunk driving would be illegal? That would certainly be way easier and cheaper to police. Why do we have building codes? Unless the house collapses or blows up, nothing bad has happemed yet.

        • SupraMario@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          Are…you assuming there are no gun laws out there? This is just dumb logic…there are over 20k laws on the books for guns…

    • macgyveringIt@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      But the additional laws take away rights from the law abiding only. The simple solution is to enforce the laws already on the books to the full extent.

      These laws only harm the lawful exercising their constitutional rights! Prosecutors will add these on but not to maximize a sentence rather to make it easier to get the bad guy to plead at the cost of not filing on some of the additional charges. Just fully enforce the laws on the books already.

        • macgyveringIt@lemmy.sdf.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          I don’t know about every states gun laws or which laws you might be referring to but I feel it’s a safe bet to say that laws that pertain to crimes committed while using a firearm have not been weakened in very many places.

          What may have been weakened are laws that restrict law abiding citizens from using firearms lawfully.

          The laws are not “weakened” so much as pleaded down to less time or lesser charges. Prosecutors do this to get an easy “win” and clear cases from their dockets. There are a lot of gun laws that I agree with but more that I disagree that they solve any of the current problems. Again, enforce what is already law and leave the good people alone.

          Don’t get me wrong, violence is horrible and should be stopped but as a realist I promise that it never will.