Two men are believed to be behind the mass shooting near the Indiana University campus in Bloomington that left nine people injured — including five young women hit by bullets or fragments, police …
nypost.com
https://www.businessinsider.com/sam-altman-chatgpt-openai-apology-letter-canada-shooting-2026-4
Suspect remains at-large after shooting at same intersection on consecutive nights.
www.wilx.com
Yes, right wing source, moving on.
Maybe it's possible back in the pre-mass drone age you could have
helped overthrow the government with firearms alone if a part of the military helped you. Now with drones and mass drones, and governments are using more drones in wars there is no point to gun rights, and the pretext for the second amendment has disappeared. It’s insane that in a civilized society people can own AR-15s and with a conversion that could means with modifications you can convert them into an automatic weapon. There are ways to stop gun violence: less guns, and less powerful guns. You do that by making guns that can gun down more people harder if not illegal for almost all people to obtain.
I am glad the government forced everyone who wants to own a drone to register with the FAA, but guns have no place in cities, and suburbs. Imagine if every mass killer can do what the average Ukrainian military drone operator does with IPV drones, and it’s possible no one knows who did it. Guns with more potency should be at a bare minimum restricted to hunters, and even then, there must be a way to lessen their prevalence.
The gun owners on reddit for example are already arguing you need them to protect yourself from other people and are pivoting and agree that guns don’t help against modern militaries like the US military, and I am guessing they meant by other people with guns, foreign brought guns, or large groups of people. If that’s the case the first one is evidence of circular logic. We need gun rights to stop other people who may want to hurt us… because they are armed as we have gun rights. Fucking what. Foreign guns can be stopped by one not having US guns(by having less guns) be sold to Mexican drug cartels which would remove this argument, two by funding Interpol and protecting people by seizing guns, and three by working with other governments to reduce the number of guns on the streets. I am sure I missed some other ways, but that’s a start. As for large groups, the way you stop large groups of people who presumably have the critical mass to beat up smaller groups of people or one person is by investing in community police who now no longer fear everyone is America having a gun as there is more guns than people in the US, being vigilant as a society against large gatherings that break the law aka gangs by fighting crime but do so ethically and stop recidivism with like ankle monitors, lowering youth unemployment, and gasp functioning well as a society. I am sure I missed others but those are the ones I can think of.
And yes, I know there are other means to die, and kill people and have people get killed like drunk driving. But guns are still a very large source of deaths.
Instead, everyone now ignores this issue. When’s the last time you have heard we need gun control. From my end it’s been none-stop other issues, but suicides by guns, and murders by guns are still here.
Also, the logical conclusion of the second amendment which I don’t support is that everyone can own automatic weapons, and things like light machine guns if we are following constitutional originalism which no one is an absolutist on including all members of the supreme court I am guessing. Since back then the revolutionary army had people with muskets in the armed forces and there were weapons back then that were air-pumped rifles that could shoot 20 plus shots, and the current US military uses in terms of small arms weapons uses assault rifles, light machine guns why not give everyone access to M249 saws, automatic M7s/M8s, M4s and M16s or just allow the AR-15s to be convertible. Do you see how dumb this logic is and how running the government with parts of bad logic from 1780s is a bad way to run a government now. I once asked a conservative and they basically had no arguments against this since it’s airtight logic despite being against this. There is no logic in allowing AR-15s, but not M16s, despite I am sure there being logic of I like the gun, and it makes lots of money for gun companies.
https://www.bradyunited.org/press/machine-gun-regulation-broomes
Edit: for clarity
www.wired.com
