Statesian here. There are a CRAPTON of mass shootings here. If we do nothing about guns, the shootings will still happen. What is the leftist answer for reducing mass shootings without disarming the proletariat?
Statesian here. There are a CRAPTON of mass shootings here. If we do nothing about guns, the shootings will still happen. What is the leftist answer for reducing mass shootings without disarming the proletariat?
Community ownership of weapons. If you want to do a mass shooting or whatever, you have to convince your local community.
Specific details discussed later
Damn why are you getting downvotes that's basically the most based answer so far.
Maybe some people haven't got the idea that, precisely, no one in going to convince their local community to hand them guns and ammunition with no scrutiny or to commit mass murder.
What's a downvote?
This was one of my ideas from anarchism that I carried over to Leninism that I think is applicable to any citizen's militia. Obviously, I could point to reactionary militias in the US to see how the idea could be corrupted, but if you're at that point already...
It also means that the community has a Space for regular training of skills relevant to insurgency, in case a larger state rolls by.
Idk, I'd be happy to bash out more ideas regarding this.
Downvotes are when people click the arrow pointing down to say that they don't like what you're writing. Maybe it's because your idea is a bit utopian since I'm not sure it could be implemented in practice in any near future but at the same time the same general idea can be adapted with stronger political structures like a revolutionary party so I'd say it's worth discussing!
Oh, the downvote question was sarcasm from the other user. She's from Hexbear and we don't have downvotes. We can't even see how many a comment/post has.
Ooh okay I see thanks for the info!
Wow yeah that's actually really good. I'm but stunned I haven't heard this before.
Ooo, will there be debates or targeted ads by each side; for and against the mass shooting?
A door-to-door grassroots campaign to stir up support?
I mean, it would probably alert someone that you're planning on doing a mass shooting. Which is the point, yeah? If we know it's going to happen, it probably won't? Because you can be like "Uh, I think Josh is going to do a mass shooting at a school, we shouldn't let him into the community armoury for the next while."
If you want to both have a civil militia AND low gun crime, you'll probably have to do this (and also have low poverty/inequality etc etc).
This would be true because militias don't mean everyone has a gun, or every type of gun, say at their bedside or residence, right? Having open access is still a kind of ownership.
Yeah, it would be like... Each block or group of blocks has a community armoury. Periodically everyone goes to a range and practices, but other than range days and maintenance, there wouldn't be much use. The point would be to remove the weapons from contexts where even "personal defence" could be raised, but still allowing the community to defend itself. There'd be a few trusted individuals in the community who have the keys to the armoury (maybe vote on it?), and breaking in would be an endeavour. Technically, there's a gun that's your gun (if that's what people want), but when the bombs start falling everyone gets one and you can kinda sort it out from there.
More rural areas would have different systems for pest control etc, as they currently do.
I do agree with the other answers on here too. Big cultural shifts, clamping down on ideologies that promote "mass shooting" as a tactic etc
Very interesting. Could I ask where I could read more about this, like an introductory text or something considered an important work?
No idea, it was the result of a bunch of discussions about what arming the proletariat and community defence might practically mean.
I imagine other people have had similar thoughts and I'm far from the most well read here.
Cuba does something similar from my understanding.
Basically, stockpile weapons in a secured location, and in the event that they're necessary, give em out to civilians reasonably expected to handle them with care.
I say "give em out to civilians", but it's civilians who decide when and why they're distributed anyway. How a DOTP functions.
I wonder how much of this can be achieved under capitalist rule. Maybe something like limiting firearms use and ownership to active members of hunting or marksmanship clubs. If you are able to handle guns safely and responsibly around other people on a regular basis you might be less likely to shoot random people.
Not sure, I obviously went in a different direction to how most people went with the question.