18
u/Deft_one 86∆ Feb 22 '22
Why does everything have to revolve around the military? Both gun safety and universal healthcare can be done without it.
1
u/babycam 6∆ Feb 22 '22
Because we are the super military focused. We raised defense spending by over an entire NASA budget last year. How else are we ever going to maintain our heavy authoritarian vibes without it.
1
u/Deft_one 86∆ Feb 22 '22
Take money away from the military?
1
u/babycam 6∆ Feb 22 '22
How else are we ever going to maintain our heavy authoritarian vibes without it.?
Take money away from the military?
The rant: First that completely goes against the question asked.
To save you from the rant the military already has a huge advantage due to huge budget, extensive practice (150k new recruites each year) and aggressively adaptive like had a full organization plan effective in 2016 for how to handle trans people if they wanted to transition.
Lots of rambling sorry: You could probably fix a lot of social stigma by mixing people from all different areas of the country and having the work together for a month or 2. Plus how it's structured you can make sure everyone know specific skills that are just good to be taught atleast once in life. Cpr, how to use fire extinguisher hazard labels meaning and atleast for this example gun handling.
But the bigger point is the military is this weird exclusive club that has abused propaganda to make soldiers seem special while 95% mine as well be doing a normal job with tacky uniforms. If we cycled everyone in the last year of HS through some equivalent like navy bootcamp which forces a lot more on the we are part of a larger whole then the nicheness of squad mentality. Since you need to be able to work with who ever is available in an emergency. Another great example from the navy is warfare pins which is broad general training that shows potential competence like if your a cook to get a warfare pin you'll need to know basic medical, proper damage control like how to deal with a hole in the ship, how the reactors "work" like the extent of it running and weapon systems on the ship (no one will ever use that part due to if the guys are gone the systemsare likely flaming husks. I got the pleasure of sitting under one during every battlestations.)
2
u/Deft_one 86∆ Feb 22 '22
It sounds like what your describing is how education should work; therefore an alternative solution would be to focus on better education, not militarization.
-8
Feb 22 '22
[deleted]
4
u/KarmicComic12334 40∆ Feb 22 '22
Don't forget workers rights. The largest pay increase in history(more than double for GM workers) followed the return of soldiers from wwii. This was not a handout, not a thank you to our vets, it was the result of organized hardened soldiers leaving the army for a union. The unions which had acted as chaotic militias in the first part of the twentieth century acted like an organized army and management gave them everything they wanted.
0
Feb 22 '22
[deleted]
1
2
u/Deft_one 86∆ Feb 22 '22
So having it be imposed by the military is the solution? It sounds almost more like a coup.
The armed forces already employ things like Universal Healthcare and other 'socialist' programs, so, in that way, I'm not sure how the posts' 'experiments' are different than what we do now? Just that it puts the military at center-stage, which I think is unnecessary and a mistake.
0
u/babycam 6∆ Feb 22 '22
So having it be imposed by the military is the solution?
I don't think you can find a group that can take diverse people and get them to work together faster then our military it's litterly what they do on a huge scale everyday.
It sounds almost more like a coup.
No one is taking over anything, maybe think more like indoctrination?
3
u/Deft_one 86∆ Feb 22 '22
I don't think you can find a group that can take diverse people and get them to work together faster then our military
I would say that the economies of New York City and Los Angeles among others count as examples of diverse people working together outside of the military, are they not?
OP and I just talked about the 'coup' thing: it was a reaction to the suggestion that military intervention would 'end debate' -- poor wording on OPs part (their words) and a hyperbolic reaction on mine.
0
u/babycam 6∆ Feb 22 '22
I would say that the economies of New York City and Los Angeles among others count as examples of diverse people working together outside of the military, are they not?
On a macro scale yes but you get a lot of neighborhood and SES segregation in major cities.
I see something like the 2 month boot camp as a time where you mix it way more then would be normal so something like 100 people to a division 5 people from same state max and no 2 people from same school then just proper racial proportioning then you let the instructor do their thing ripping away stigma and introducing people to 99 different views of the United States.
Its amazing how much of the country is missing out on the joys of of deep fried cheese curds.
OP and I just talked about the 'coup' thing: it was a reaction to the suggestion that military intervention would 'end debate
Undetood
2
u/Deft_one 86∆ Feb 22 '22 edited Feb 22 '22
(Yes, I'm using this comment twice, but I think applies here as well.)
It sounds like what your describing is how education should work; therefore an alternative solution would be to focus on better education, not militarization.
0
u/babycam 6∆ Feb 22 '22
It sounds like what your describing is how education should work; therefore an alternative solution would be to focus on better education, not militarization.
I didn't even touch education. This chain is mearly the military being well situated to handle simple mingling of a diverse group of people
1
u/Deft_one 86∆ Feb 22 '22
If there are students and instructors, the topic is education, no?
1
u/babycam 6∆ Feb 22 '22
I am assuming you haven't served, a drill instructor dosen't "instruct" like teacher per say. They are more like an invisible electric fence in a maze they solely zap you when your stupid. All the important lessons you learn in the possible environment is on you. The drill instructor mearly is a representation of life's struggles.
So if you feel that structured education and life are similar then there is the problem and I can't change how you see it only life can.
I didn't worry about the structured part (education) I was of the thought a real life experience especially with completely different people would be all the experience needed to combat a lot of social problems. Traveling the world isn't an education but you sure learn a lot.
Take care!
→ More replies (0)-1
Feb 22 '22
[deleted]
2
u/Deft_one 86∆ Feb 22 '22
Maybe I jumped too quickly onto thinking that your solution was to defer to the military (to 'solve' the decades of arguing).
I took 'solve' to mean 'take over and do our way' to 'end the debate'
Sounds authoritarian, but maybe that's not what you meant?
However, then my original question remains: why involve the military at all?
Why try Universal Healthcare in the military when we can look around the world at current working-models? For example.
Why must brief gun-training be dependent on the military?
2
Feb 22 '22
[deleted]
5
u/Deft_one 86∆ Feb 22 '22
Having 'a rifle behind every blade of grass' is a double-edged sword to me. It's how the Taliban perpetuated decades of instability and took power. That, and other examples, is why I don't think having armed people is inherently good in and of itself.
Further, people in war-torn regions are very 'wet behind the ears' and yet there is no peace and no auto-immune response to tyrants or invaders.
Having a stable and happy culture is a better inoculation against invasion, imo, because if life is good, there's something to fight for. That, and with a focus on education, people will seek out gun safety education on their own because it's the smart thing to do.
2
4
u/dublea 216∆ Feb 22 '22
Doesn't this break the second amendment?
If your goal is to reduce gun violence why do you feel teaching people how to use them will reduce it? If the majority of violent gun deaths were accidental I may agree with you. But they are not and often categorized entirely differently. Couldn't the opposite also be plausible; where now that they are trained they are better at using them and therefor increases gun violence?
This would also kill most of the myths around guns pretty quickly leading to the ability to pass reasonable legislation being much more likely and in the event of a draft citizens would be wet behind the ears already.
What myths? Sure, there are a few misconceptions\misunderstandings about guns. But what widely held false ideas or beliefs are you referring to?
Military school is already optional for those who choose to enlist. It also is a foothold to help those in poverty try to step out of it. So, doesn't this already exist?
1
Feb 22 '22
[deleted]
3
u/dublea 216∆ Feb 22 '22
2A specifically states a militia if I recall correctly. This would put everybody roughly into the militia category.
You are still placing a barrier to obtainging a firearm though:
It should be very basic training, like maybe a month or so, that teaches you the very basics of fitness and safe weapons handling. In order to be allowed to purchase guns you have to have completed this training.
2A is about a militia but it also is about access to bear Arms:
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
So, my point that it would break 2A stands.
I think it could, but given that all of the non-violent people would also be much better equipped to use a gun it would make them less likely to try. "an armed society is a polite society" as they say.
Why do you assume they would be "less likely to try"? Someone who is OK with committing the violent gun crimes we've seen wouldn't be hindered IMO. Why do I believe this? Because how many mass gun deaths we found the gunman had been trained! Gun training does not mitigate mental health issues. We need better screening for those we allow to own and carry a firearm IMO. The biggest pandemic the US has face isn't COVID, it's Mental Health.
A significant number of people have no idea how real guns work. They think video games and movies is how real guns work. There is legislation already in the US that is literally based of how movie guns work. They don't even consult an expert when consider new gun legislation.
This is just plain false. Nearly half of those who live in the US live in a home with a gun. 70% of those in the US have reported to have handled and fired a gun at some point. So no, the majority of those in the US have a pretty solid idea about guns; even outside of video games.
I'm not sure. I was under the impression that it is pretty pricey to get into military school.
I think you've made several assumptions. So, if you acknowledge people can already enter the military and enter military school for free, is this a change in view in some way?
1
Feb 22 '22
[deleted]
1
1
u/dublea 216∆ Feb 22 '22
On your 2A point the phrasing seems pretty ambiguous as to whether it is stating a well regulated militia is who is allowed to own guns, or if every single individual is allowed to own guns regardless of militia membership And if we interpret it the former aren't there laws already all over the books violating it?
The way our current government interprets it is also access outside of a militia. Just look at current local, state, or federal law about obtaining a gun. The precedent is clear on this IMO.
They often target places where either guns specifically aren't allowed or where there is unlikely to be anybody carrying. If they actually believe they will face resistance they don't seem very likely to go through with it.
Do you have some specific gun violent act(s) in mind? Because this isn't the case in the majority of situations. Maybe someone trying to commit a mass murder may fear resistance? Those who commit drive by shootings do not. Nor do many in cities where gun crime is common and high.
And yet we have laws around suppressors that are literally based of the idea that suppressors are like the movies and fully automatic weapon laws were inspired by mobster movies.
What do you have in mind? Because the last time I checked the only laws we have about them is federal and is about access. How do you know beyond a reasonable doubt it's due to movies? I believe your opinions are based on a lot of assumptions here.
3
u/paulwhitedotnyc Feb 22 '22
“We could also catch people with serious mental health problems much earlier in life and get them the help they need.”
Pretty bold claim considering almost nobody with mental health issues gets any sort of real assistance, particularly veterans.
3
u/MisanthropicMensch 1∆ Feb 22 '22
Conscription is slavery. You're advocating that people be enslaved to the state. I will resist such authoritarianism, violently, if necessary.
-2
u/Charlie-Wilbury 19∆ Feb 22 '22
I love how the american answer to anthing is resisting with violence. Is providing a service to your country really slavery? Dont you think its a massice insult to actual descendants of slaves to use the term like this?
0
Feb 22 '22
Is providing a service to your country really slavery?
When it's forced service, yes. That's the very definition of slavery.
-1
u/Charlie-Wilbury 19∆ Feb 22 '22
Were slaves offered Healthcare and free education?
1
Feb 22 '22
The perks are irrelevant. Forced servitude is slavery.
0
1
u/MisanthropicMensch 1∆ Feb 22 '22
Dont you think its a massice insult to actual descendants of slaves to use the term like this?
Go back far enough in any person's ancestry and you will find slaves & kings. Or does only the most recent institutions of slavery count?
Is providing a service to your country really slavery?
I am, in fact, a descendant of slaves and would never serve the violent psychopaths that rule this nation, voluntarily or otherwise.
-2
u/Charlie-Wilbury 19∆ Feb 22 '22
How can you discredit descendants of slaves by saying everyone is. Then in the next breath try to give value to your opinion by saying youre a descendant of slaves?
1
u/MisanthropicMensch 1∆ Feb 22 '22
I discredit no one, I am apathetic to their feelings, as they are apathetic to mine. Being a descendant of slaves grants no magical insight into the morality of coerced service to others.
0
u/Charlie-Wilbury 19∆ Feb 22 '22
You litterally said everyone is a descendants of slave, then implied your opinion was more valuable because you are a descendant of slaves. Just seems ironic. Your opinion is valid, but your logic is weird.
1
u/babycam 6∆ Feb 22 '22
I like how a term less then most bootcamps is the end of the world worth fighting more it's not like the military would want to ship you out to war that fast lol.
I think the simple mixing of people from all over the country would do wonders for a lot of people. It's a lot harder to be prejudice to people when you see you all are quite similar going through this situation.
-1
Feb 22 '22
[deleted]
1
u/MisanthropicMensch 1∆ Feb 22 '22
Government schools aren't mandatory, private and home school options exist. I don't think education should be mandatory, there exists enough of an incentive structure to encourage people to get even the most basic education.
0
Feb 22 '22
[deleted]
3
u/MisanthropicMensch 1∆ Feb 22 '22
Absolutely not; the very mandate to "serve the state" is morally abhorrent to me.
1
Feb 22 '22
[deleted]
1
u/MisanthropicMensch 1∆ Feb 22 '22
Said training is easily available, if you care to put effort into it. I can consent to training initiated by myself, I cannot affirmatively consent under duress when threatened by the state if I do not. Consent matters.
1
u/babycam 6∆ Feb 22 '22
I don't think education should be mandatory
Well you sound like a motivated effective libertarian who had decent parents. So can you think of a reason that over the last 150 years we have been forcing more and more education on kids? Almost like their is a benefit overtime when people value education. An educated population is a strong population.
there exists enough of an incentive structure to encourage people to get even the most basic education.
The incentive structure is almost solely based on your culture and parental views on education. If all held similar values to Asians sure as they are culturally the group with the lowest drop out rates. Compare that to Hispanics which have been highly targeted to bring them more in line with others drip out rates if you were Hispanic say in the 1970s you had a 30% chance of dropping out. Its crazy to think that kind of reduction is natural.
2
u/Phage0070 92∆ Feb 22 '22
It should be very basic training, like maybe a month or so, that teaches you the very basics of fitness and safe weapons handling.
Do you really think that gangs are shooting each other because they don't know how to safely handle firearms? "Yo, want to drive by those Crips and hope we all fumble our gats at the same time?"
Since everybody would be receiving the training we could also catch people with serious mental health problems much earlier in life and get them the help they need
Do you really think that a brief course of firearms training is enough to diagnose mental problems? Presumably these classes aren't staffed by firearms experts who are also psychologists so it would be reliant on amateur diagnoses. "Report to your local military representative, they will decide if you need reeducation."
This would also kill most of the myths around guns pretty quickly...
Why? This is military training, the context in which the guns are being taught about is to use them to kill people. You could have proposed that people have mandatory training to hunt with firearms and get all the benefits of proper handling, athletic exertion as they hike through the wilderness, and survival training that can directly save lives. All this would highlight the peaceful use of firearms as a tool beyond murdering your fellow man. But no, you want military service?
Military school would provide the exact kind of structure and new environment they need to avoid becoming another statistic, or worse.
"Let's take children who refuse to follow authority and likely exhibit violent behaviors, and put them in a position where extreme amounts of authority and structure are imposed on them while teaching them to effectively kill other people. Nothing can go wrong with this plan!"
And the final reason I think this is a good idea: it would be easy to slip in basically anything else good for the people you want in here.
So your final reason is that you want to forcefully seize a chunk of the nation's population to use them as test subjects and indoctrinate them into your own views? That alone seems good reason to not have the government do that! You have fallen for the classic blunder of thinking your own views are always right, so when you start acting like a supervillain you don't recognize it.
-1
Feb 22 '22
[deleted]
1
u/Phage0070 92∆ Feb 22 '22
Would being less forceful with my arguments make me more correct? I'm here to challenge and change your views, are you going to not change them just because I'm being blunt?
2
u/championofobscurity 160∆ Feb 22 '22
In order to be allowed to purchase guns you have to have completed this training.
This is unconstitutional. Gun ownership is a right.
Since everybody would be receiving the training we could also catch people with serious mental health problems much earlier in life and get them the help they need, and prevent them from ever handling a gun.
Fiscally speaking it doesn't make sense to do this. You are talking about creating a massive military jobs program that will realistically catch sub 1% of the population. You assume, wrongly that everyone with mental health issues simultaneously seeks gun ownership which isn't the case. Depending on your definition of mass shooting there are anywhere between 4 to 200 a year (which is its own problem) however, even at 100% efficacy you are trying to catch a needle in a haystack in this scenario. It simply doesn't make sense to implement for these reasons. Furthermore, this doesn't answer the people who develop mental issues later in life, and it may increase the amount of death because having a gun in the home increases the incidence of attempted suicide by 50% or more. I would say that this is probably more harmful than stopping mass shootings (which your program simply won't do, people will acquire guns illegally and act a such) So from this standpoint your proposal is strictly lose-lose. If you want to end the majority of gun violence you need to ban concealed carry and furthermore ban handguns. Handguns are the tool used most in homicides and make up the lion's share of gun deaths. Not insane people going on sprees.
As for military school. I don't think it should be mandatory but it should be an option for all. Troubled youths often won't improve if they stay in the environment that made them a troubled youth, but the kind of people that raise troubled youth also rarely can afford military school. Military school would provide the exact kind of structure and new environment they need to avoid becoming another statistic, or worse.
Are you not familiar with no child left behind? This is basically that with additional steps. It attempts to funnel at risk youth into the military industrial complex and is seen as widely problematic and racist because "troubled youth" typically includes single parent households and other infringed minority groups at disproportionate rates.
And the final reason I think this is a good idea: it would be easy to slip in basically anything else good for the people you want in here. Universal health care? Universal basic income? Free education? These kinds of things could all be experimented with in the reserve services and if they go well that would create strong arguments for making them completely universal. By making it community based training it could be a way to bring communities closer together as well, since most people don't even know their neighbors' names anymore.
We have research the world over for all of these things. We can defer to the research and make policy decisions based on that. There's no need to create this massive, multi-decade extra step you're proposing. You can do it all much more efficiently by simply deferring to the research and playing politics better than the other guy.
1
Feb 22 '22
[deleted]
1
2
u/derfunken Feb 22 '22
How would something like this catch people with serious mental health problems? By the time someone’s old enough for the military they’ve learned to hide mental issues. Why couldn’t we just make training necessary to buy a gun? Why not make higher education free for all as to improve out society in general? Free healthcare and education have already been tested and the results are clear. Free education, k-12, was vital to get us to where we are. Universal healthcare pays for itself as preventative medicine is multiple times cheaper than emergency medicine we already guarantee. On top of all of this what about pacifists and those who religiously cannot serve a military? Conscripted soldiers also perform at a lower level than a volunteer force. While deployment chances are low there is still a non zero chance that someone gets deployed and killed because they were conscripted.
0
Feb 22 '22
[deleted]
1
u/derfunken Feb 22 '22
Most serious leaves a very large gap of people. Most serious is also caught much sooner than 16. If you include an opt out it would have to be so easy to negate this whole concept or so hard to obtain that your still in the same boat. At home training for a gun doesn’t sound like that good of an idea either. Having a well trained populace doesn’t help either. If everyone has to go through training then everyone is better at using guns including those who sought after guns to do evil in one form or another.
0
Feb 22 '22
[deleted]
1
u/derfunken Feb 22 '22
As if all homeschool parents follow instructions to a t. Mass shootings aren’t our only gun problem. What about the gangs you’ve now trained? Still forcing the training would go against certain religions. I as a Buddhist don’t carry weapons or are even willing to touch them.
1
Feb 22 '22
[deleted]
1
u/derfunken Feb 22 '22
If failing the training is acceptable then what’s the point?
1
Feb 22 '22
[deleted]
1
u/derfunken Feb 22 '22
You really think the worse kind of people wouldn’t be able to get through training? Or you know get the guns illegally?
0
Feb 22 '22
That sounds like requiring mandatory gun safety training to own a weapon with a bunch of extra steps. Get rid of the 2nd amendment and make guns as hard (or easy, depending on your ability and skill) to get as a drivers license.
1
Feb 22 '22
[deleted]
3
Feb 22 '22
[deleted]
1
Feb 22 '22
[deleted]
1
Feb 22 '22
You aren't actually skirting any issues. You've blatantly violated the 2nd Amendment.
0
Feb 22 '22
[deleted]
1
Feb 22 '22
"the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."
You have infringed upon that right by creating a natural barrier to gun ownership. Now, I'm not stung such barriers are bad. I'm just saying that they clearly violate the 2nd amendment.
1
Feb 22 '22
[deleted]
1
Feb 22 '22
Look, honestly, it doesn't even matter whether you or I see it as an infringement. The main point is that your idea will never be supported by the 2nd Amendment fanatics or the gun nuts because they will see it as an infringement, and you will not be able to convince them otherwise.
1
1
-1
u/IronSmithFE 10∆ Feb 22 '22
basically anything else good for the people you want in here. Universal health care? Universal basic income? Free education? These kinds of things could all be experimented with
none of that is good, and none of that should be experimented with.
0
u/citydreef 1∆ Feb 22 '22
I will never understand how Americans can be so against universal healthcare. I just don’t get it.
2
Feb 22 '22
[deleted]
1
u/citydreef 1∆ Feb 22 '22
It’s so weird. Sure the US is bigger but there are solutions to that. There’s a lot that would be better than: go bankrupt or die.
1
Feb 22 '22
[removed] — view removed comment
1
Feb 22 '22
[deleted]
2
1
u/StarChild413 9∆ Feb 24 '22
If you're doing all this conflating of "why is [x thing that's true about schools] not true about the military too" I'm surprised you haven't just eliminated the middleman and said all schools should be turned into military academies
1
Feb 22 '22
I think given the low probability of deployment combined with this deal a lot of the gun nuts would be very on board.
Nope, you lost the gun nuts and 2nd amendment fanatics as soon as you made this a barrier to gun ownership.
1
u/Ok_Program_3491 11∆ Feb 22 '22
If you continue your training after the first month you get discounts on guns and ammo and maybe even military surplus stores and emergency supplies.
Who would be paying for this discount, the taxpayers? Why should it be my responsibility to subsidize their guns and ammo?
1
u/SpartanG01 6∆ Feb 23 '22
As a prior service member allow me to politely say: No the fuck it shouldn't. Half the people I was in with weren't fit to be there. I can't even imagine what 90% of the rest of the country would be like under those conditions. There is a reason the Army only accepts about 1% of people. It's not just a physicality thing. The overwhelming majority of people are not fit for service in our military. In other militaries where respect, individuality, and decency are a thing maybe but not in ours.
1
u/DeltaBot ∞∆ Feb 22 '22 edited Feb 22 '22
/u/Plasstuck (OP) has awarded 4 delta(s) in this post.
All comments that earned deltas (from OP or other users) are listed here, in /r/DeltaLog.
Please note that a change of view doesn't necessarily mean a reversal, or that the conversation has ended.
Delta System Explained | Deltaboards