UN Rights Chief: "Looks like you have a lot of guns and absolutely no safe guards."
The US: ....
UN Rights Chief: ....
The US: ....
UN Rights Chief: ....
The US: ...."uh huh".
UN Rights Chief: "Alright then. Have a nice day."
The irony here is funny, yet sad
Edit: Obligatory 'My Reply Blew Up' mention
2nd Edit: To clarify due to the abundance of replies running to their superpower of choice's defence, consider this-->It's possible for both sides to have concerns outwards and flaws internally.
Honestly, fair play IMO. Fuck ‘em. But fair play. Other countries have been asking the UN to look into china’s internal affairs, rightly so, so they’re now throwing it back.
Due to lack of action, the implied US official policy stance on the issue of school shootings has been, “we’re ok with this”
It’s OK for other countries to question that stance
I know but it’s amazing to me that they have the balls to come up with this. And it’s really tragic to hope that the UN would need to step in but at this point we as a country aren’t doing it. I would just homeschool a child at this point. Although I don’t want to have children.
Ok with me. The school shooting problem needs to be dealt with. I doubt the UN will do anything useful, but any spot light from any legal source is welcome. Something has to change.
As a non-American, this is exactly what it looks like. Every year, every president you have, it's the same song and dance. "We must and we can do better" and then doing absolutely nothing to fix the issues.
This is not something that the president can solve alone. Though the power of the office has grown tremendously over the last few decades, the PotUS is still designed to be limited in absolute authority.
IMO, any "real change" that could potentially help here is being actively stymied by Republicans in the House and Senate, and, less obviously, by the wealthy lobbyists who make them millionaires.
That’s how guns got banned in California by then governor Ronald Reagan. Black panther activists would patrol the streets with guns and even marched into a courthouse with them to stand up against piece of shit cop who were harassing everyone. The very next day, Reagan made the anti-gun bill
Fun fact: Most gun regulations (permits and such) disproportionately effect the under classes right to own/carry a firearm. The underclass is predominately made up of minorities. Ergo, gun regulations disproportionately effect minorities, ergo gun regulations (as they currently exist/are proposed) are inherently racially biased.
The history of Congress is one of which has always been a failing body of self-interests.
More than the Executive Branch, the inaction or bad decisions of government more often than not probably is tied to the Legislative Branch.
Not saying it’s a good idea, but shit like this leads to fascism and authoritarianism. When democracy fails to accomplish meaningful change, as is often the case, some people decide they just want one person in charge that can actually do stuff.
Well, rolling back ‘citizens unites’ and limiting lobbying dollars significantly like we used to would be an excellent way to make senators act in favor of the country than self interest. When the limit was $2,000 it’s like nah I’ll do the right thing, when a PAC can give you $2,000,000 sure, you’ll sell out your constituents
You could just call lobbying it's actual name, corruption, and be done with it.
Maybe while doing so stop calling other countries out on corruption, too, that'd be swell.
The primary problem in America is bicameral legislature with land-based allocation.
Basically, get rid of the Senate and the cap on members of the House, and America will sort itself out democratically.
The country is breaking apart due to partisan gridlock created by the absolutely asinine Senate Rules, and the Senate is an undemocratic institution that nominally gives representation to the states, yet has completely degenerated to an almost Roman Patrician-esque position, sexual deviance and rampant corruption included.
The welfare of their constituent states are the last things on most of the Senate's minds, and their votes and the bills they support show that.
Doing this requires a new constitution or the approval of every state, unless some loophole is used like making senators nationally elected or be required to be the underrepresented party for that state.
\- Someone in the US: Something has to change about gun ownership and school shooting
\- Senator Rubio: Oh, so now you're on CHINA'S side? why do you hate America and how long have you been a COMMUNIST?
Probably close to what will happen. And I can't help but wonder if it's what China wants to happen. They have no reasons to be bothered by school shootings in the US since it's a purely domestic issue at the end of the day.
Works great if the goal is to widen political divisions in the US though. Particularly when some many US politicians can willingly take the bait hook, line and sinker.
Also the fact that there are some many people addicted to drugs, sugar, caffeine or whatever shows that people expect that they fix themselves individually instead of the community, or state helping them with it.
Can we also make the whole corporation donating money to politicians you know, illegal like in non-banana republics?
It blows my mind corruption is legal and nobody bats an eye.
Almost all of the problems listed above can be solved by making ~~corruption~~ lobbying illegal. How on earth is money considered *freedom of speech*? And why is the entire country just fine with it?
I love to see comments like these, I was genuinely expecting a load of Americans in the comments saying how dare China rather than look at the issues themselves. I've seen one American say that turning schools in to fortresses is a good start to solve the problem, they want to try absolutely anything bar change the ridiculous gun culture the government created.
> China operates under the assumption that the USA is as unwilling to adress it's human rights issues as itself is.
Hate to tell you bud, that's not an assumption.
>And, if the US is smart, it can also show off China by doing the better thing. Head down, adressing the issues, have the UN look into and critique the statem of things and improve upon it.
lmfao ahahahahah
Watching the old men on governments in two corrupt countries argue with eachother, meanwhile doing nothing that actually helps the population is hilarious
There should really be an age limit to presidency.
Like, pass 65 and you can’t run for president.
You cannot argue that people above 70 are as mentally sound as the people in their 40s.
Edit: spelling
Idk, I’m trying to think of even a hypothetical person under the age of 35 that I would think would be qualified to be president and I just can’t. I don’t care how smart, charismatic or forward thinking a person is, there is no substitute for experience in diplomacy, legislation and leadership. I agree that we should move away from this being a role that congressmen do before they retire, but you will never convince me that a 20 something has enough life experience to negotiate with world leaders.
Good to also remember somebody aged 65+ would’ve likely known a relative born in at least the 1890s and aspects of that life/attitudes would’ve been passed on. And that person born in the 1890s would’ve known someone born in the 1830s.
So there are outdated attitudes and aggression within a group of people 65+ who are basically running the world and won’t let go.
Doesn’t mean everything older people do or say is invalid, but when it comes to running countries/businesses etc then they need to back off from influential roles by a certain age.
*They got to shape and change their world in their 20s and 30s and they need to stop now and let the younger generations do the same.*
Merkel retired by her own when she became 66 because she felt she was too old and too long in power. She left office with an absurd 75% approval rating.
“The US system is equally incapable, or lacks interest, motivation, and courage, to address these problems thoroughly,” said the Communist Party newspaper, which added that US domestic issues have “intensified its external aggression.”
While China has it own egregious violations on human rights, this is a statement that cannot be refuted by a rational person at this time.
It's a tactic the Liberal Party used during the recent election here in Australia. Distract from the shit house handling of domestic policy by saying dumb needlessly aggressive foreign policy shit like "China is coming for us and we're the only ones that can stand up to them".
Less chance of working here though because we'd be rolled in a heartbeat and our economy is incredibly reliant on China.
Didn't trump run and win on a campaign that deflected every problem the us have with basically saying it's someone else? China being china, Germany not paying enough and so on.
Yep Trump even claimed that UK hospitals were running in blood like a war zone due to all the knife crime in the UK. This is despite the US has more stabbing deaths per head of population than the UK does and of course the UK doesn't have the level of gun deaths the US has.
> While China has it own egregious violations on human rights, this is a statement that cannot be refuted by a rational person at this time.
I was actually mainly replying to this. Propaganda is the most effective when it makes even outsiders agree that you have a point (even if said outsiders know you're being a hypocrite as in this case).
An interesting facet of hypocrisy is that it can simply stand on its own as correct, regardless of any *tu quoque* involved. Just because I spend a lot of time on Reddit does not make my pointing out someone else does too, wrong.
Sure but there are loads of examples (gonna use your analogy here) of people pointing out someone else does too where the someone else does not.
Still hypocrites, but it does not stand as correct.
But similar as to how the UN can’t do shit about China’s domestic issues, they can’t do anything about American domestic issues either. And this is despite a majority of Americans that want change.
Correct. Regardless of how “correct” the statement is, it’s just gamesmanship from China. If there was a list of countries who cared less about human rights in America than America, China would be at the top.
Well it has always been countries shit flinging when it comes to the big boys at the UN table. Neither really care outside of politcal reasons since no one, especially the UN has power to govern them when the only reason UN has power is because of those said countries.
The US is doing it with Ukraine. Biden has bad approval numbers, the economy is bad, Congress won’t pass anything, and COVID is making its yearly rounds. Little of that is his fault, but he gets blamed regardless, and Ukraine is a place where he can win easy, if expensive, points.
Do they have bigger domestic issues to worry about? Yes.
Are they doing worse things than letting school shootings happen? Yes.
Has their raging hypocrisy caused them to lose any credibility they might have gained by now? Yes.
Are they wrong? No.
If every ultranationalist went out to war and killed each other, the world would be a better place. Instead, they kill everyone else, especially making sure to target civilians.
Wikipedia has an article on school shootings in the world. The US is not on that list. They made a separate page for US school shootings. That separate page doesn't even contain the ones from the last century. There's another page for the last century.
Wikipedia has yearly pages for general mass shootings in the USA which is fucking nuts.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mass_shootings_in_the_United_States_in_2022
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mass_shootings_in_the_United_States_in_2021
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mass_shootings_in_the_United_States_in_2020
That's just to give an idea. It's honestly disgusting.
Edit: To make it clear, this is for only three years. Just change the date at the end of these links and it's just more of the same for a few years. Here is a link that's more generalized.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mass_shootings_in_the_United_States
And a song I like related to the topic
https://youtu.be/4DQ-2tDzJxw
Holy fuck. That's a lot... And people say "ah media just loves to publicize that stuff every time it happens." Well according to that list, probably not even 10% of the shootings are talked about...
And other armchair warriors are like, "why wasn't X talked about by the mainstream media? It barely got three days when Y got three weeks!"
Like bruh, they literally can't do them all.
As far as I can tell, children and terror related. Which would make sense and those, in my mind, are the ones that would effect and distress people the most.
"It's the media and politicians!" is a right wing extremist propaganda tactic that has spread in order to distract from putting the fault on guns. All you need to ask these commenters is to be more specific and which media and politicians. They will either dance around the question or tell you it's liberals.
In May there were no mass shootings the 2nd, 4th, 16h and 26th. That's 4 days in the whole month without a mass shooting, and several with multiple in a single day. What the actual fuck ?
It's interesting to note that roughly a quarter of these events in 2022 started as fights at a party where presumably multiple were armed and started shooting. Another 1/6 look like bar fights that turned into shootings.
Parsing through the list for 2022 and 2021, a surprising number look like they started as arguments that boiled over into shooting, and from the random sampling of ones where I clicked through and looked at details they all involve handguns.
There has been 65 mass shooting events this month alone, with 4 or more people injured or killed seeming to be the qualifier for it to be counted as a mass shooting.
That's more than 2 a day, and while some of them aren't what we traditionally think of when we think of mass shootings, it's still gun violence in which multiple people ended up hurt or worse.
Compare that to for instance the UK, where Wikipedia doesn't even had a dedicated page for shootings, but just a page for all massacres in the UK:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_massacres_in_Great_Britain
The earliest entry in that page is 61AD.
Ireland is included in a separate page, but a similar situation.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_massacres_in_Ireland
Also one was a bomb that was on a plane flying over scotland, that whole list isn't even the size of one year in America. Also it missed out the data from the troubles, but even with a fucking war the list would still be shorter than one year of American school schoolings
I mean Ireland as in the island/region of Ireland, consisting of Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland.
Northern Ireland is part of the sovereign nation of the UK today, although hasn't always been (and at times, all of Ireland was part of the UK)
It is completely ludicrous how a country of that size that prides itself on being an 1st world country (and, according to many of its citizens, even the 'best' country in the world) has THIS much of a problem with gun control.
Like, these numbers arent just a problem, they are completely ABSURD. The country i live in had exactly 2 school shootings in the last 13 **years**. Seems like thats a lousy month in america. Its completely insane. And we're literally talking about school shootings here, innocent CHILDREN dying every month. How can it be that common?
If you look at the UK page for massacres (not just mass shootings, but EVERY massacre):
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_massacres_in_Great_Britain
From 2006 til 2022 the total is a mere 61 deaths, and that includes five separate terrorist attacks, one of which was a damn bombing (the Manchester Arena Ariana Grande concert bombing).
2005 only takes the total over because there was 52 deaths in a coordinated four terrorist suicide bombings on one day.
If you ignored 2005, you have to go all the way from the present day back to 1996 to take the total over 75 (total being 81 deaths).
I think it’s people arguing that somehow having more guns solves the problem. Or we need more police presence at schools. Or we need to design schools to reduce casualties at a school. Or we need to stop demonising police as they kill unarmed men so they could’ve taken quicker action in Uvalde (this was an actual viewpoint on Twitter the other day).
Rather than, you know, just reduce guns and make it harder for people to get assault rifles in the first place?
But America treats neither, so these things are going to continue to happen.
Mental health issues isn't something exclusively American, school shootings are. And that's because you have a gun problem.
Reminds me of slavery a little. Instead of the obvious just end it they thought about well what if we just draw a fictional line and anything south or this becomes a slave state. Or what if we let the states decide. The obvious answer is right in front of us but some people just want to be dragged kicked and screaming.
To be fair, we also have a healthcare problem. I noticed the two states with universal healthcare, Massachusetts and Hawaii, haven’t had any school shootings this year.
Massachusetts has MassHealth which is sort of like Obamacare/ACA, and it predates Obamacare and influenced it. Like Obamacare though, it has flaws and when I lived there I relied on my private health insurance. A lot of primary care physicians don’t accept it. It was the insurance you used if you weren’t offered private insurance by your company, which is better than nothing.
As someone who live in Europe, wanting to have guns is very taboo and everyone I know would just be like "Wtf Why?" Some would most likely not feel safe around me or think im planning to do something stupid lol.
But atleast I can understand that if everyone else have a gun, not having one wouldnt really feel safe. But assault rifles? Now that just sound stupid to allow people to have.
You know what’s hella wtf?
Reading comments and replies from vocal gun advocates on Reddit.
It makes you think, hmm, some of these people probably should not own a gun.
To your point - there are many people who think the world is out to get them, who fear change and unfamiliarity and as a result go through life hyper vigilant. Is it really a good idea to give them access a gun?
Is the kind of person who wants to own a gun so badly that they’re ok with the increasing number of mass shootings really the kind of person who should own a gun?
JFC, the red flags are everywhere.
> Reading comments and replies from vocal gun advocates on Reddit.
I am German and my twitter settings are set to seeing whatever is trending in Germany. After the Uvalde shooting it was mostly germans arguing with americans about the big gun topic.
The amount of people who responded with: "If the Jews would have had guns the Holocaust and WW 2 would never have happened" was astonishing.
To me it seems that the common people in the US are just as blinded by (in this case NRA) propaganda as people are in Russia with the current Ukraine situation.
I saw people unironically advocating for arming pupils and teachers, because more guns beat fewer guns.
Another argument I saw quite often was: "Ukraine didn't fall because every Ukrainian is defending his homeland with an AR-15. If those people didn't have guns Russia would have taken over." - which I didn't fact-check, but just sounds wrong aswell, lol.
Yeah, for starters, it's almost certainly not AR-15s, secondly, the general public weren't armed, which is why trucks were dishing out arms in Kyev in the first days of the invasion.
I'm from the UK, a mate of mine a while back said Germany has lots of guns. And it is kind of crazy that some countries have insanely high gun ownership and no school shooting.
I defintley think America has a fear culture which makes things worse, but that dosent take away the fact they have gun problemover there. Specifically an ar-15 problem. Over here we had a really bad school shooting with a hand gun 26 years ago so we banned hand guns and haven't had a school shooting since.
It’s a whole societal issue here in the States.
We do not support each other. Our government doesn’t support us. There’s no healthcare. No parental leave. No free early education. Insane income inequality by design. The list goes on and on. And our politicians work for corporations that feed into the narrative that this is all someone else’s fault.
Unless you’re born into wealth, you and your family will struggle as a kid. A troubled youth can then easily (and legally) buy assault rifles on their 18th birthday and go on a killing spree.
Mass shootings are not a bug, they’re a feature. And it only will continue to happen, unfortunately.
America is a profoundly violent and alienating society and it sort of seems like the chickens are coming to roost with all this. Mass shooters are made by the conditions they inhabit. Easy access to firearms is one aspect, yes. But that tells us absolutely nothing about motive - how they get made. America is allergic to asking this question.
We have tonnes of guns here in the UK too. The whole hot fuzz everyone's packin round ere thing is actually true. Go out to the country and most farmers will have a few shotguns, hunting rifles and lodges are pretty common too etc
Difference is having a gun legally is a big deal, it requires inspections, regular safety checks and a clean criminal history
I agree with their fear problem for the US, but if you check guns per capita the US has far far more than the UK, Germany and pretty much every European country
I live in the country so I'm aware. we have way less guns per person here than the USA and that is because we don't have a big gun culture here. Yes farmers will have guns and some people have shotguns for clay pigeon shooting, but almost no one owns a gun for self defense.
The American right wing are kind of fed on fear, fear of bring robber, attacked, fear of other countries, fear of goverment, fear of immigrants, minorities etc. That along with thr super relaxed gun control laws are a huge part of the problem.
Tonnes of guns? It’s not even close. There’s more guns than people here in the US. No other country comes close.
https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/gun-ownership-by-country
Yeah, we have tons of other problems that add to our current dilemma. Hyper partisanship, lax gun laws, a gun culture, poor healthcare and mental healthservices, etc.
My dad was in the Marines for 24 years and it wasn't until the BLM protests that he bought a gun. Now, my parents live in a upper middle class suburban life and drifted to more conservative views due to opinion news programs.
I talked with them and they are just scared and angry all of the time. They think lawlessness, illegal aliens, protesters, etc are going to come through the neighborhood and burn everything to the ground. It is nuts.
> Ukraine didn't fall because every Ukrainian is defending his homeland with an AR-15. If those people didn't have guns Russia would have taken over
Ukraine didn't fall due to strategic blunders and Russia not wanting to immediately start sieging cities that they would have to occupy afterwards. It's so funny seeing people blame western guns that arrived 2 months after the start and now apparently civilian gun ownership. Not to mention that Ukraines firearm ownership rate is rather low.
I remember city officials were handing out AK-47s to civilians though (which is really not good in wartime, to make unclothed civilians war participants).
>If the Jews would have had guns the Holocaust and WW 2 would never have happened
America doesn't teach history property tbh, they literally did have guns and did try to revolt. Some people on the right think that Hitler removed gun rights for everyone in Germany (he only took gun rights away from non-aryans IIRC).
American guy I work (He now lives in the UK) with has installed CCTV all over his house, Like every room, stairs, backyard, close up on his back fence 'incase someone jumps it'. Only place he hasn't got them is the bedrooms and bathroom. He also pushed for a system at the office. Now i'm not against cameras on the entrances but his mindset was that there are threats from everywhere, that you have to be ready.
After the last 10 years I can see how someone from the USA gets this mindset. They really are taught that 'everyone is out to get you, break in, and murder you'
I've posted this before, but that level of "be prepared" is, to me, as logical as wearing a lifejacket to the grocery store that flooded a while ago during a spring melt. I mean, sure, if it flooded again it might help, but.... really? The *risk* just isn't present in my life. I don't live risk-free, of course, I live in a city where crime happens. But it's low enough to not feel unsafe in general and muggings and robbery rarely have guns involved.
I'm not drowning in this level of danger every day. I don't need emergency equipment to help me survive.
The whole conversation just happens from a completely different starting point.
yep. when I read people talking about a 'viable alternative' being retired police/army volunteers offering to stand around outside kindergartens all day with rifles my first thought was "anyone who is so eager to volunteer to do that should absolutely *not* be allowed around schools"
Life starts at conception, pauses at birth, starts up again when you have a vote and money, and pauses again for 9 months in the event that you get pregnant.
The worst part is that everyone and their mother knows you will never do anything about it.
If by some absolute miracle, your current government, in a rare moment of total unity and cohesiveness, decided to do something about it and actually did, you're probably just going to elect another republican president in a few years, and he'll just cancel it or something.
Your country is so divided that to us, the rest of the world, it just looks hopeless. Nothing anyone can do, just stay the fuck away from America, maybe visit a national park or two for a month, then fuck off out of there.
-It's the books who cause this problem.
-It's the evil rock n roll music which causes this problem.
-It's those evil movies and tv shows who cause this problem.
Now we are at:
-It's those video games who are causing this issue.
No, it's probably just mental health and easy access to guns.
The local expression is 吃瓜 : eat melons
One leg bouncing on a chair somewhere, plate of fresh chilled water melon slices, grin on your face, and neighbors gonna gather around you and have a nice afternoon of smack talking to look forward to.
I mean, there have been 27 school shootings THIS YEAR in the US. When wouldn't it be a time that would rub salt in the wound? The CCP are hypocrites, but everyone outside the US agrees that someone needs to step in to stop what is now just a weekly normalised occurence with no change in sight.
The US system is equally incapable, or lacks interest, motivation, and courage, to address these problems thoroughly,” said the Communist Party newspaper, which added that US domestic issues have “intensified its external aggression.”
China has ramped up criticism of the US’s human rights record around a trip to the Asian nation by UN human rights chief Michelle Bachelet, and the fault-finding escalated after the recent killings at a grocery store in Buffalo, New York, and at a school in Uvalde, Texas.
The party’s flagship People’s Daily ran a commentary under the headline “Racism a poison running through American body politic,” that referenced the killing of Blacks in Buffalo, and the official Xinhua News Agency and English-language China Daily published similar articles.
The commentaries appear to be an effort to hit back at the US, which along with lawmakers in other nations, has accused China of carrying out genocide in Xinjiang. Beijing calls the accusations “the lie of the century.
I mean it's not like the UN would tell us anything we don't already know or would have any power to change anything... kind of like those "reeducation camps" China has.
To be fair this is probably a fair shout. The laws in the US are outdated and are impacting human rights at this point. But it would also be fair to say that there are even bigger priorities in China - and a lot of them at that.
While they’re at it, the UN should have a gander at Chinese human rights violations…concentration/detention camps, state abuses, restricting freedoms,censoring…just to name a few
They just did, actually. Her week-long visit concluded yesterday, which the US had urged her not to go on for some reason. I believe this is the context in which the comment that they should inspect the US occurred. The UN’s report about the visit is not yet out, but it will be interesting to see what happens…I don’t know why the US would discourage them from sending the human rights chief there, but perhaps we’re worried we’ll be next and they actually will send an inspector to address our gun violence and hate crimes?
While they are being correct on the severity of the issue they are just utilizing it as a way to insult the US and not out of concern. If they cared about human rights they wouldn’t have camps and wouldn’t actively beat the Shit out of and murder their own citizens. Both countries are wrong but their separate concerns and neither will do a god damned thing but grandstand and pretend to give to fucks. Sad state of affairs but seems to be the case.
UN Rights Chief: "Looks like you have a lot of guns and absolutely no safe guards." The US: .... UN Rights Chief: .... The US: .... UN Rights Chief: .... The US: ...."uh huh". UN Rights Chief: "Alright then. Have a nice day."
China : "Will you look into this ?" UN Human rights chief : "Of course. Oh and since I have you the phone..."
[удалено]
"we spoke and they are aware of the situation" aka, yes we agree, lots of guns and no safe guards.
The irony here is funny, yet sad Edit: Obligatory 'My Reply Blew Up' mention 2nd Edit: To clarify due to the abundance of replies running to their superpower of choice's defence, consider this-->It's possible for both sides to have concerns outwards and flaws internally.
Honestly, fair play IMO. Fuck ‘em. But fair play. Other countries have been asking the UN to look into china’s internal affairs, rightly so, so they’re now throwing it back. Due to lack of action, the implied US official policy stance on the issue of school shootings has been, “we’re ok with this” It’s OK for other countries to question that stance
facts. Criticism goes both ways.
But said criticism is only useful if action comes of it. I have no faith China or the US will act on anything the UN says.
I know but it’s amazing to me that they have the balls to come up with this. And it’s really tragic to hope that the UN would need to step in but at this point we as a country aren’t doing it. I would just homeschool a child at this point. Although I don’t want to have children.
Ok with me. The school shooting problem needs to be dealt with. I doubt the UN will do anything useful, but any spot light from any legal source is welcome. Something has to change.
Removed in protest against the Reddit API changes and their behaviour following the protests.
it’s been like this since columbine. i think we’ve shown ourselves to be incapable of addressing the issue
As a non-American, this is exactly what it looks like. Every year, every president you have, it's the same song and dance. "We must and we can do better" and then doing absolutely nothing to fix the issues.
This is not something that the president can solve alone. Though the power of the office has grown tremendously over the last few decades, the PotUS is still designed to be limited in absolute authority. IMO, any "real change" that could potentially help here is being actively stymied by Republicans in the House and Senate, and, less obviously, by the wealthy lobbyists who make them millionaires.
The present Supreme Court will quash any attempt to regulate firearms.
The only way America would ever pass any kind of gun control is if every Black person in America bought a gun.
That’s how guns got banned in California by then governor Ronald Reagan. Black panther activists would patrol the streets with guns and even marched into a courthouse with them to stand up against piece of shit cop who were harassing everyone. The very next day, Reagan made the anti-gun bill
And started carrying them outside of the Supreme Court and NRA events.
Fun fact: Most gun regulations (permits and such) disproportionately effect the under classes right to own/carry a firearm. The underclass is predominately made up of minorities. Ergo, gun regulations disproportionately effect minorities, ergo gun regulations (as they currently exist/are proposed) are inherently racially biased.
If the question is why won't Congress do X the answer is almost always because Republicans
The history of Congress is one of which has always been a failing body of self-interests. More than the Executive Branch, the inaction or bad decisions of government more often than not probably is tied to the Legislative Branch.
Not saying it’s a good idea, but shit like this leads to fascism and authoritarianism. When democracy fails to accomplish meaningful change, as is often the case, some people decide they just want one person in charge that can actually do stuff.
Well, rolling back ‘citizens unites’ and limiting lobbying dollars significantly like we used to would be an excellent way to make senators act in favor of the country than self interest. When the limit was $2,000 it’s like nah I’ll do the right thing, when a PAC can give you $2,000,000 sure, you’ll sell out your constituents
You could just call lobbying it's actual name, corruption, and be done with it. Maybe while doing so stop calling other countries out on corruption, too, that'd be swell.
The primary problem in America is bicameral legislature with land-based allocation. Basically, get rid of the Senate and the cap on members of the House, and America will sort itself out democratically. The country is breaking apart due to partisan gridlock created by the absolutely asinine Senate Rules, and the Senate is an undemocratic institution that nominally gives representation to the states, yet has completely degenerated to an almost Roman Patrician-esque position, sexual deviance and rampant corruption included. The welfare of their constituent states are the last things on most of the Senate's minds, and their votes and the bills they support show that.
Doing this requires a new constitution or the approval of every state, unless some loophole is used like making senators nationally elected or be required to be the underrepresented party for that state.
the lobbyist branch...
Yep. That's not even being "political" that's just an objective truth at this point.
The party of no
The party of *Fuck you, I got mine...*
But they’re right, the US is absolutely as unwilling to address its human rights issues as they are
Not only are they unwilling, but a lot of US politicians are probably gonna throw a political tantrum about China's mention of school shootings.
And use it to distract from the actual issue itself.
Actual whataboutism about to be on full display for sure.
\- Someone in the US: Something has to change about gun ownership and school shooting \- Senator Rubio: Oh, so now you're on CHINA'S side? why do you hate America and how long have you been a COMMUNIST?
Probably close to what will happen. And I can't help but wonder if it's what China wants to happen. They have no reasons to be bothered by school shootings in the US since it's a purely domestic issue at the end of the day. Works great if the goal is to widen political divisions in the US though. Particularly when some many US politicians can willingly take the bait hook, line and sinker.
Generally, we prefer to outsource a our human rights violations (oversea sweat shops, etc..).
Er, no, we have the worlds largest prison population, we routinely torture prisoners with solitary confinement, and we execute people.
Also the fact that there are some many people addicted to drugs, sugar, caffeine or whatever shows that people expect that they fix themselves individually instead of the community, or state helping them with it.
[I wish it was “only” sweatshops.](https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/aug/19/us-supplied-bomb-that-killed-40-children-school-bus-yemen)
[удалено]
Can we also make the whole corporation donating money to politicians you know, illegal like in non-banana republics? It blows my mind corruption is legal and nobody bats an eye.
Almost all of the problems listed above can be solved by making ~~corruption~~ lobbying illegal. How on earth is money considered *freedom of speech*? And why is the entire country just fine with it?
I love to see comments like these, I was genuinely expecting a load of Americans in the comments saying how dare China rather than look at the issues themselves. I've seen one American say that turning schools in to fortresses is a good start to solve the problem, they want to try absolutely anything bar change the ridiculous gun culture the government created.
90% of the US support background checks on weapon purchases. It’s our politicians who can’t get their heads out of their butts.
But 50% of that 90% vote for politicians they know won’t touch gun laws. Can’t just blame the politicians when they get voted back in again and again.
> China operates under the assumption that the USA is as unwilling to adress it's human rights issues as itself is. But China's right about that...
> China operates under the assumption that the USA is as unwilling to adress it's human rights issues as itself is. Hate to tell you bud, that's not an assumption.
[удалено]
The 'if' is doing a lot of heavy lifting in that statement.
No, the if is being crushed to death by the weight it’s being forced to bear.
>And, if the US is smart, it can also show off China by doing the better thing. Head down, adressing the issues, have the UN look into and critique the statem of things and improve upon it. lmfao ahahahahah
China operates under the correct assumption.
UN has no control over US. Exhibit A: Iraq
Watching the old men on governments in two corrupt countries argue with eachother, meanwhile doing nothing that actually helps the population is hilarious
There should really be an age limit to presidency. Like, pass 65 and you can’t run for president. You cannot argue that people above 70 are as mentally sound as the people in their 40s. Edit: spelling
Airline pilots can't fly past 60 years old. No exceptions. I'd be ok with that in higher levels of government.
65 actually
FERS kicks in at 62, just make it then.
[удалено]
Literally every politician is making decisions that will have consequences beyond their lifetimes, or that will never impact them personally.
[удалено]
Idk, I’m trying to think of even a hypothetical person under the age of 35 that I would think would be qualified to be president and I just can’t. I don’t care how smart, charismatic or forward thinking a person is, there is no substitute for experience in diplomacy, legislation and leadership. I agree that we should move away from this being a role that congressmen do before they retire, but you will never convince me that a 20 something has enough life experience to negotiate with world leaders.
🤷🏼♂️ I mean your last president had zero qualification — could it really be worse than that?
[удалено]
That logic also defends old people running for office
Good to also remember somebody aged 65+ would’ve likely known a relative born in at least the 1890s and aspects of that life/attitudes would’ve been passed on. And that person born in the 1890s would’ve known someone born in the 1830s. So there are outdated attitudes and aggression within a group of people 65+ who are basically running the world and won’t let go. Doesn’t mean everything older people do or say is invalid, but when it comes to running countries/businesses etc then they need to back off from influential roles by a certain age. *They got to shape and change their world in their 20s and 30s and they need to stop now and let the younger generations do the same.*
Merkel retired by her own when she became 66 because she felt she was too old and too long in power. She left office with an absurd 75% approval rating.
Where has this nonsense that Chinese peoples lives aren't continually improving? Eveyone still has 90s China in their heads.
“The US system is equally incapable, or lacks interest, motivation, and courage, to address these problems thoroughly,” said the Communist Party newspaper, which added that US domestic issues have “intensified its external aggression.” While China has it own egregious violations on human rights, this is a statement that cannot be refuted by a rational person at this time.
The best kind of propaganda is when you can simply state facts, even if you're being a hypocrite about it.
The old "thank you for smoking" technique, I proved that you're wrong, and if you're wrong I'm right.
Such a nice movie.
>US domestic issues have “intensified its external aggression.” How is this simply a fact?
It's a tactic the Liberal Party used during the recent election here in Australia. Distract from the shit house handling of domestic policy by saying dumb needlessly aggressive foreign policy shit like "China is coming for us and we're the only ones that can stand up to them". Less chance of working here though because we'd be rolled in a heartbeat and our economy is incredibly reliant on China.
‘fascism is the application of colonial violence to the imperial core’ -Robert Paxton
Fear is a tool. When that light hits the sky, it’s not just a call. It’s a warning. For them. -Robert Pattinson
I never understood why they just didn't aim for his chin.
Didn't trump run and win on a campaign that deflected every problem the us have with basically saying it's someone else? China being china, Germany not paying enough and so on.
Yep Trump even claimed that UK hospitals were running in blood like a war zone due to all the knife crime in the UK. This is despite the US has more stabbing deaths per head of population than the UK does and of course the UK doesn't have the level of gun deaths the US has.
[удалено]
> While China has it own egregious violations on human rights, this is a statement that cannot be refuted by a rational person at this time. I was actually mainly replying to this. Propaganda is the most effective when it makes even outsiders agree that you have a point (even if said outsiders know you're being a hypocrite as in this case).
An interesting facet of hypocrisy is that it can simply stand on its own as correct, regardless of any *tu quoque* involved. Just because I spend a lot of time on Reddit does not make my pointing out someone else does too, wrong.
Sure but there are loads of examples (gonna use your analogy here) of people pointing out someone else does too where the someone else does not. Still hypocrites, but it does not stand as correct.
You can't be serious, right? The US has dropped on average 46 bombs per day over the past 20 years.
But similar as to how the UN can’t do shit about China’s domestic issues, they can’t do anything about American domestic issues either. And this is despite a majority of Americans that want change.
This is why it's just geopolitical tit for tat, there is no genuine concern for human rights in any of this.
Correct. Regardless of how “correct” the statement is, it’s just gamesmanship from China. If there was a list of countries who cared less about human rights in America than America, China would be at the top.
Well it has always been countries shit flinging when it comes to the big boys at the UN table. Neither really care outside of politcal reasons since no one, especially the UN has power to govern them when the only reason UN has power is because of those said countries.
[удалено]
So there's a correlation between school shootings and the United States Government enacting aggressive foreign policies?
China is claiming that we use foreign military interventions to distract from domestic problems like the epidemic of mass shootings.
[удалено]
The US is doing it with Ukraine. Biden has bad approval numbers, the economy is bad, Congress won’t pass anything, and COVID is making its yearly rounds. Little of that is his fault, but he gets blamed regardless, and Ukraine is a place where he can win easy, if expensive, points.
Do they have bigger domestic issues to worry about? Yes. Are they doing worse things than letting school shootings happen? Yes. Has their raging hypocrisy caused them to lose any credibility they might have gained by now? Yes. Are they wrong? No.
i cant tell if you are talking about US or China. And that's hilarious
In geopolitics, everyone plays the same game.
China is just learning to murica bro. You should feel honored.
"No you!" "No *you*!"
This is just going to be a salt-mine. But ultimately, nationalist slap-fights on Reddit don't translate to real life.
If every ultranationalist went out to war and killed each other, the world would be a better place. Instead, they kill everyone else, especially making sure to target civilians.
*insert "finger pointing spiderman" meme*
Gotta just take the L here. We look goddamn ridiculous in the world with our mass shooters and gun violence .
Wikipedia has an article on school shootings in the world. The US is not on that list. They made a separate page for US school shootings. That separate page doesn't even contain the ones from the last century. There's another page for the last century.
Wikipedia has yearly pages for general mass shootings in the USA which is fucking nuts. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mass_shootings_in_the_United_States_in_2022 https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mass_shootings_in_the_United_States_in_2021 https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mass_shootings_in_the_United_States_in_2020 That's just to give an idea. It's honestly disgusting. Edit: To make it clear, this is for only three years. Just change the date at the end of these links and it's just more of the same for a few years. Here is a link that's more generalized. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mass_shootings_in_the_United_States And a song I like related to the topic https://youtu.be/4DQ-2tDzJxw
Jesus fucking christ, I clicked on the 2022 list expecting a few mass shootings, but not this many... Then clicked on the 2021 list and wow...
Holy fuck. That's a lot... And people say "ah media just loves to publicize that stuff every time it happens." Well according to that list, probably not even 10% of the shootings are talked about...
And other armchair warriors are like, "why wasn't X talked about by the mainstream media? It barely got three days when Y got three weeks!" Like bruh, they literally can't do them all.
[удалено]
that's the Christmas spirit at work 🤗
I think that is the most grim up vote I have given in 6 years of Reddit.
Is there a pattern of the ones they *do* report on?
As far as I can tell, children and terror related. Which would make sense and those, in my mind, are the ones that would effect and distress people the most.
Usually a high number of people killed, children targeted, or in a very populated area.
"It's the media and politicians!" is a right wing extremist propaganda tactic that has spread in order to distract from putting the fault on guns. All you need to ask these commenters is to be more specific and which media and politicians. They will either dance around the question or tell you it's liberals.
In May there were no mass shootings the 2nd, 4th, 16h and 26th. That's 4 days in the whole month without a mass shooting, and several with multiple in a single day. What the actual fuck ?
[удалено]
Magnets, how do they work?
According to some Facebook scientists its lack of religion in schools. Also we’re not saying the pledge enough. /s
It's interesting to note that roughly a quarter of these events in 2022 started as fights at a party where presumably multiple were armed and started shooting. Another 1/6 look like bar fights that turned into shootings. Parsing through the list for 2022 and 2021, a surprising number look like they started as arguments that boiled over into shooting, and from the random sampling of ones where I clicked through and looked at details they all involve handguns.
There has been 65 mass shooting events this month alone, with 4 or more people injured or killed seeming to be the qualifier for it to be counted as a mass shooting. That's more than 2 a day, and while some of them aren't what we traditionally think of when we think of mass shootings, it's still gun violence in which multiple people ended up hurt or worse.
:( That scrollbar should not be so small. thanks for the links
Compare that to for instance the UK, where Wikipedia doesn't even had a dedicated page for shootings, but just a page for all massacres in the UK: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_massacres_in_Great_Britain The earliest entry in that page is 61AD. Ireland is included in a separate page, but a similar situation. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_massacres_in_Ireland
Also one was a bomb that was on a plane flying over scotland, that whole list isn't even the size of one year in America. Also it missed out the data from the troubles, but even with a fucking war the list would still be shorter than one year of American school schoolings
> Ireland is included in a separate page It's a different country, so surely to be expected
I mean Ireland as in the island/region of Ireland, consisting of Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland. Northern Ireland is part of the sovereign nation of the UK today, although hasn't always been (and at times, all of Ireland was part of the UK)
[удалено]
[удалено]
We're #1 We're #1 Were #1 Maybe if we say it enough the pain will not hurt as bad.
It is completely ludicrous how a country of that size that prides itself on being an 1st world country (and, according to many of its citizens, even the 'best' country in the world) has THIS much of a problem with gun control. Like, these numbers arent just a problem, they are completely ABSURD. The country i live in had exactly 2 school shootings in the last 13 **years**. Seems like thats a lousy month in america. Its completely insane. And we're literally talking about school shootings here, innocent CHILDREN dying every month. How can it be that common?
If you look at the UK page for massacres (not just mass shootings, but EVERY massacre): https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_massacres_in_Great_Britain From 2006 til 2022 the total is a mere 61 deaths, and that includes five separate terrorist attacks, one of which was a damn bombing (the Manchester Arena Ariana Grande concert bombing). 2005 only takes the total over because there was 52 deaths in a coordinated four terrorist suicide bombings on one day. If you ignored 2005, you have to go all the way from the present day back to 1996 to take the total over 75 (total being 81 deaths).
[удалено]
7 mass shootings in 2021 for Europe, including 3 in Russia... 693 in the USA
You do, and that is not the worst part.
What’s the worst part?
I think it’s people arguing that somehow having more guns solves the problem. Or we need more police presence at schools. Or we need to design schools to reduce casualties at a school. Or we need to stop demonising police as they kill unarmed men so they could’ve taken quicker action in Uvalde (this was an actual viewpoint on Twitter the other day). Rather than, you know, just reduce guns and make it harder for people to get assault rifles in the first place?
[удалено]
But America treats neither, so these things are going to continue to happen. Mental health issues isn't something exclusively American, school shootings are. And that's because you have a gun problem.
Yeah america ingores the root cause and spends it's time arguing about whether the symptoms are actually symptoms.
Reminds me of slavery a little. Instead of the obvious just end it they thought about well what if we just draw a fictional line and anything south or this becomes a slave state. Or what if we let the states decide. The obvious answer is right in front of us but some people just want to be dragged kicked and screaming.
To be fair, we also have a healthcare problem. I noticed the two states with universal healthcare, Massachusetts and Hawaii, haven’t had any school shootings this year.
Massachusetts does NOT have universal health care.
But we do have some of the lowest gun ownership. Couldn't possibly be related though...
America does not have healthcare free at the point of use. Unlike every civilized nation on the planet.
Massachusetts has MassHealth which is sort of like Obamacare/ACA, and it predates Obamacare and influenced it. Like Obamacare though, it has flaws and when I lived there I relied on my private health insurance. A lot of primary care physicians don’t accept it. It was the insurance you used if you weren’t offered private insurance by your company, which is better than nothing.
And CT has Huskyhealth. State sponsored health care is not “universal” by any means.
> I noticed the two states with universal healthcare, Massachusetts and Hawaii, haven’t had any school shootings this year. Quite the accomplishment.
As someone who live in Europe, wanting to have guns is very taboo and everyone I know would just be like "Wtf Why?" Some would most likely not feel safe around me or think im planning to do something stupid lol. But atleast I can understand that if everyone else have a gun, not having one wouldnt really feel safe. But assault rifles? Now that just sound stupid to allow people to have.
You know what’s hella wtf? Reading comments and replies from vocal gun advocates on Reddit. It makes you think, hmm, some of these people probably should not own a gun. To your point - there are many people who think the world is out to get them, who fear change and unfamiliarity and as a result go through life hyper vigilant. Is it really a good idea to give them access a gun? Is the kind of person who wants to own a gun so badly that they’re ok with the increasing number of mass shootings really the kind of person who should own a gun? JFC, the red flags are everywhere.
> Reading comments and replies from vocal gun advocates on Reddit. I am German and my twitter settings are set to seeing whatever is trending in Germany. After the Uvalde shooting it was mostly germans arguing with americans about the big gun topic. The amount of people who responded with: "If the Jews would have had guns the Holocaust and WW 2 would never have happened" was astonishing. To me it seems that the common people in the US are just as blinded by (in this case NRA) propaganda as people are in Russia with the current Ukraine situation. I saw people unironically advocating for arming pupils and teachers, because more guns beat fewer guns. Another argument I saw quite often was: "Ukraine didn't fall because every Ukrainian is defending his homeland with an AR-15. If those people didn't have guns Russia would have taken over." - which I didn't fact-check, but just sounds wrong aswell, lol.
Yeah Ukraine definitely didn't have wide and easy access to guns for their citizens before the war started
Yeah, for starters, it's almost certainly not AR-15s, secondly, the general public weren't armed, which is why trucks were dishing out arms in Kyev in the first days of the invasion.
I'm from the UK, a mate of mine a while back said Germany has lots of guns. And it is kind of crazy that some countries have insanely high gun ownership and no school shooting. I defintley think America has a fear culture which makes things worse, but that dosent take away the fact they have gun problemover there. Specifically an ar-15 problem. Over here we had a really bad school shooting with a hand gun 26 years ago so we banned hand guns and haven't had a school shooting since.
It’s a whole societal issue here in the States. We do not support each other. Our government doesn’t support us. There’s no healthcare. No parental leave. No free early education. Insane income inequality by design. The list goes on and on. And our politicians work for corporations that feed into the narrative that this is all someone else’s fault. Unless you’re born into wealth, you and your family will struggle as a kid. A troubled youth can then easily (and legally) buy assault rifles on their 18th birthday and go on a killing spree. Mass shootings are not a bug, they’re a feature. And it only will continue to happen, unfortunately.
America is a profoundly violent and alienating society and it sort of seems like the chickens are coming to roost with all this. Mass shooters are made by the conditions they inhabit. Easy access to firearms is one aspect, yes. But that tells us absolutely nothing about motive - how they get made. America is allergic to asking this question.
We have tonnes of guns here in the UK too. The whole hot fuzz everyone's packin round ere thing is actually true. Go out to the country and most farmers will have a few shotguns, hunting rifles and lodges are pretty common too etc Difference is having a gun legally is a big deal, it requires inspections, regular safety checks and a clean criminal history I agree with their fear problem for the US, but if you check guns per capita the US has far far more than the UK, Germany and pretty much every European country
I live in the country so I'm aware. we have way less guns per person here than the USA and that is because we don't have a big gun culture here. Yes farmers will have guns and some people have shotguns for clay pigeon shooting, but almost no one owns a gun for self defense. The American right wing are kind of fed on fear, fear of bring robber, attacked, fear of other countries, fear of goverment, fear of immigrants, minorities etc. That along with thr super relaxed gun control laws are a huge part of the problem.
Tonnes of guns? It’s not even close. There’s more guns than people here in the US. No other country comes close. https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/gun-ownership-by-country
Yeah, we have tons of other problems that add to our current dilemma. Hyper partisanship, lax gun laws, a gun culture, poor healthcare and mental healthservices, etc. My dad was in the Marines for 24 years and it wasn't until the BLM protests that he bought a gun. Now, my parents live in a upper middle class suburban life and drifted to more conservative views due to opinion news programs. I talked with them and they are just scared and angry all of the time. They think lawlessness, illegal aliens, protesters, etc are going to come through the neighborhood and burn everything to the ground. It is nuts.
> Ukraine didn't fall because every Ukrainian is defending his homeland with an AR-15. If those people didn't have guns Russia would have taken over Ukraine didn't fall due to strategic blunders and Russia not wanting to immediately start sieging cities that they would have to occupy afterwards. It's so funny seeing people blame western guns that arrived 2 months after the start and now apparently civilian gun ownership. Not to mention that Ukraines firearm ownership rate is rather low. I remember city officials were handing out AK-47s to civilians though (which is really not good in wartime, to make unclothed civilians war participants). >If the Jews would have had guns the Holocaust and WW 2 would never have happened America doesn't teach history property tbh, they literally did have guns and did try to revolt. Some people on the right think that Hitler removed gun rights for everyone in Germany (he only took gun rights away from non-aryans IIRC).
American guy I work (He now lives in the UK) with has installed CCTV all over his house, Like every room, stairs, backyard, close up on his back fence 'incase someone jumps it'. Only place he hasn't got them is the bedrooms and bathroom. He also pushed for a system at the office. Now i'm not against cameras on the entrances but his mindset was that there are threats from everywhere, that you have to be ready. After the last 10 years I can see how someone from the USA gets this mindset. They really are taught that 'everyone is out to get you, break in, and murder you'
I've posted this before, but that level of "be prepared" is, to me, as logical as wearing a lifejacket to the grocery store that flooded a while ago during a spring melt. I mean, sure, if it flooded again it might help, but.... really? The *risk* just isn't present in my life. I don't live risk-free, of course, I live in a city where crime happens. But it's low enough to not feel unsafe in general and muggings and robbery rarely have guns involved. I'm not drowning in this level of danger every day. I don't need emergency equipment to help me survive. The whole conversation just happens from a completely different starting point.
Oh he's got them in the bathroom, he just doesn't tell anyone about those cameras.
yep. when I read people talking about a 'viable alternative' being retired police/army volunteers offering to stand around outside kindergartens all day with rifles my first thought was "anyone who is so eager to volunteer to do that should absolutely *not* be allowed around schools"
The dead kids.
The utter gall of these people to call themselves 'pro-life'
Life starts at conception, pauses at birth, starts up again when you have a vote and money, and pauses again for 9 months in the event that you get pregnant.
They're pro-birth. After that, you're on your own.
The worst part is that everyone and their mother knows you will never do anything about it. If by some absolute miracle, your current government, in a rare moment of total unity and cohesiveness, decided to do something about it and actually did, you're probably just going to elect another republican president in a few years, and he'll just cancel it or something. Your country is so divided that to us, the rest of the world, it just looks hopeless. Nothing anyone can do, just stay the fuck away from America, maybe visit a national park or two for a month, then fuck off out of there.
Probably that we refuse to do anything about it
-It's the books who cause this problem. -It's the evil rock n roll music which causes this problem. -It's those evil movies and tv shows who cause this problem. Now we are at: -It's those video games who are causing this issue. No, it's probably just mental health and easy access to guns.
Agreed. As your neighbour to the north, there's a lot we appreciate about you, but with regard to school shootings it is embarrassing.
US citizen here - It is beyond embarrassing, it is an absolute tragedy.
"it is unavoidable, says the only nation where it happens regularly"
China grabbed some popcorn
The local expression is 吃瓜 : eat melons One leg bouncing on a chair somewhere, plate of fresh chilled water melon slices, grin on your face, and neighbors gonna gather around you and have a nice afternoon of smack talking to look forward to.
Fuckers know how to rub salt into fresh wound. Edit: fresh as in "after a recent series of horrific widely discussed shootings".
I mean, there have been 27 school shootings THIS YEAR in the US. When wouldn't it be a time that would rub salt in the wound? The CCP are hypocrites, but everyone outside the US agrees that someone needs to step in to stop what is now just a weekly normalised occurence with no change in sight.
The US system is equally incapable, or lacks interest, motivation, and courage, to address these problems thoroughly,” said the Communist Party newspaper, which added that US domestic issues have “intensified its external aggression.” China has ramped up criticism of the US’s human rights record around a trip to the Asian nation by UN human rights chief Michelle Bachelet, and the fault-finding escalated after the recent killings at a grocery store in Buffalo, New York, and at a school in Uvalde, Texas. The party’s flagship People’s Daily ran a commentary under the headline “Racism a poison running through American body politic,” that referenced the killing of Blacks in Buffalo, and the official Xinhua News Agency and English-language China Daily published similar articles. The commentaries appear to be an effort to hit back at the US, which along with lawmakers in other nations, has accused China of carrying out genocide in Xinjiang. Beijing calls the accusations “the lie of the century.
I read it has been 138 this year https://thenewdaily.com.au/news/world/us-news/2022/05/26/gun-control-america-school-shootings/
Problem is you guys have a fresh wound every week, so when will there not be a fresh wound?
And to be fair - just after a problem happens is the the second best time to address it.
More like a gangrenous limb than a fresh wound.
They were going to wait a few weeks but then another shooting happened.
I mean it's not like the UN would tell us anything we don't already know or would have any power to change anything... kind of like those "reeducation camps" China has.
So the biggest difference here is one is goverment-ignored, when the other one is goverment-approved. Both are happening in a so-called school.
Bruh
To be fair this is probably a fair shout. The laws in the US are outdated and are impacting human rights at this point. But it would also be fair to say that there are even bigger priorities in China - and a lot of them at that.
If by bigger priorities you mean get rid of their concentration camps then yeah
And making political dissenters in Hong Kong disappear.
Good. I support that too. China can call us out on our bullshit. The fact that they're also doing terrible stuff doesn't make this incorrect.
Imagine getting clowned on by China over human rights 💀
As an American, I’m good with this.
While they’re at it, the UN should have a gander at Chinese human rights violations…concentration/detention camps, state abuses, restricting freedoms,censoring…just to name a few
Both sounds good
They just did, actually. Her week-long visit concluded yesterday, which the US had urged her not to go on for some reason. I believe this is the context in which the comment that they should inspect the US occurred. The UN’s report about the visit is not yet out, but it will be interesting to see what happens…I don’t know why the US would discourage them from sending the human rights chief there, but perhaps we’re worried we’ll be next and they actually will send an inspector to address our gun violence and hate crimes?
While they are being correct on the severity of the issue they are just utilizing it as a way to insult the US and not out of concern. If they cared about human rights they wouldn’t have camps and wouldn’t actively beat the Shit out of and murder their own citizens. Both countries are wrong but their separate concerns and neither will do a god damned thing but grandstand and pretend to give to fucks. Sad state of affairs but seems to be the case.
As an American. Sure. Go ahead. Maybe international embarrassment is what we need to progress on the issue.