Cry all you want big boy, the science is on the side of us non-brainwashed, rational people who understand the need for actual gun regulation in a civilised country.

Too bad the US hardly qualifies to that group any more. Third world level literacy rates, so many homeless that human shit is an actual issue in supposedly civilised cities, and firearms as the leading cause of death for children.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/darreonnadavis/2023/10/05/firearms-now-no-1-cause-of-death-for-us-children---while-drug-poisoning-enters-top-5/

There’s a literal mountai in the of evidence showing that all you need to do to start facing this problem is reasonable nation-wide gun regulation. Something everyone knows works and something that you won’t find science against, because gun regulation being the answer is as clear to most people as is the fact that the Earth is round, not Flat.

But you will find Flat Earther crazies who won’t believe in the science even when their own science proves that they are indeed wrong.

You’re emotional. You get so angry when you’re reminded that you go against science because you don’t have the balls to actually use your own brain.

https://epirev.oxfordjournals.org/content/38/1/140.full.pdf+html

And you having “shot guns” doesn’t make you an expert on guns

Oh yeah no, it doesn’t bear any rationale to this argument. It’s just there because gun nuts always default to the “you’re just afraid of my pew-pew sticks, that’s why you support gun regulation”. Nah. I love guns, they’re fun. But you know what I care more about than loud bangs? That children don’t have to live in fear of some incel fucktards charging into their school with a pimped out AR15 with a bumpstock.

There’s literally not a single peer reviewed study that concludes that less gun control is better, for anything.

But I’m sure the lack of science won’t stop you, just like it doesn’t stop Flat Earthers.

You’re really just here to prove my point about the willfull ignorance of nuts like you. So… thanks, I guess?

Any gun nut feel like arguing for insanity that are US gun laws?

All you need to do is ignore science and reality and every other country outsider of the US and be convinced that undiagnosed schizophrenics being able to buy a shedload of semi-automatic weapons is necessary for democracy.

All I need to do is remind you that there’s not a single piece of study that supports any of the arguments of the gun nutters.

(Also, just because it seems to matter to these nuts, I started shooting at 12 and have handled everything from old officer’s pistols to shotguns to modern assault rifles, machine guns, grenades, mines, and even AA guns. Shooting is fun, yeah, but having fun isn’t more important than making sure children don’t have to live under the constant threat of their fellow pupils pulling out a semi-auto with a bump-stock.)

But if it does not, it is still used against Israel. What do you want Israel to do?

To stop the genocide they’re committing. I thought this was pretty clear from all the protests?

I think this is really unfair criticism.

I think it’s generally agreed that slaughtering children and raping and torturing people is wrong. Perhaps you were raised differently?

Shouldn’t it be on them to prove it is a “fabrication”?

Like if I made the claim that you enjoy breaking spaghetti in half when you make any (and no-one is watching), how would you ever possibly prove that it’s not true?

The former and possibly future president of the USA, criticising the quality of sex work from the literal child he’s raping.

“Arguing” by listing a long list of fallacies that they don’t really even understand.

Fallacy fallacy!

Even the whiff of money blinds greedy fucks from seeing any consequences.

Being an incel is a choice

It’s short for “involuntarily celibate”, though.

Although I guess identifying with those words is the choice you’re talking about

aren’t mentally ill. The most generous descriptors I could give them is that they’re either misguided, brainwashed, or both.

I’d argue that their brains are at a state of did-order, be that due to someone having pushed propaganda on them or not.

Some people are less capable of being critical of their own thoughts. For example, young children are very impressionable. Lots of people grow out of it. Lots of people don’t.

If I harassed you with say, targeted ads and some videos I made on YouTube, it could definitely make you stressed out, thus me having affected your mental health.

Now being a racist because you grew up in a small racist/sexist/homophobic town or something might not be the exact same thing, but the point I’m trying to make is that their wrong choices — like “choosing” (I use quotations because it’s not exactly a conscious choice people make, although displaying those attitudes definitely is) to be racist or transphobic or whichever kind of bigot — are a symptom of the disorder they’re having.

That disorder usually being amathia, willfull ignorance.

Even before that, we had formidable defence force.

Just us alone, with EU’s largest artillery, but on top of that, NORDEFCO and the defence clause of the EU.

But NATO is a bonus yeah.

Unless you’re a spy who ran from Russia (and basically not even then, as we have supo), why would that matter?

Unlike the US, Finland has and continues to successfully avoid Russia meddling in it’s affairs.

We got labour protection, social security and have among other things, fixed homelessness.

Yes, there’s a lot of issues as well, but compared to other countries, I’d say the average person is fairly well off in Finland in terms of financial security. Mental health is a whole other matter, though.

I’ll let anyone buy a Finnish residency. Just pay me a to-be-agreed-upon sum and then we’ll get married and it should be quite a done deal. Perhaps need to keep addresses the same on paper for a few years but that’s it.

Hit me with them offers.

Yes, abusing drugs of other classes can cause depression too.

Who ever argued it didn’t?

A depressant, when not abused, relieves symptons of depression (and even when abused, often relieves them upon intake).

It also relieves those symptoms despite being abused.

on drug abuse and addictiveness are incredibly flawed in the first place. That doesn’t make your anecdotal experience from a drug ward

I literally emphasised how anecdotal experiences aren’t evidence enough, which is WHY I LINKED ACTUAL PEER REVIEWED DATA.

My point is not that CNS depressants don’t cause depression from abuse, but that it’s just a result of abusing drugs, not the fact that they’re a depressant class drug.

And you’re wrong. First off, research the difference between the terms “addiction” and “dependence”, and then read the science I just linked in my previous reply.

You’re willfully ignorant, pretending you understand a subject you’re barely conversant in. (Why do people feel the need to do this online?)

I used the analogy, because it’s literally how the depression causing part of downers caused psychological depression; by long-term CNS depression.

That’s why alcoholism is so strongly linked to depression. Just like benzo abuse and opioid abuse, but unlike meth, speed and other stims, which tend to cause mania.

(I feel like I’m repeating myself here. Probably because I am, and you just keep ignoring the actual science, because it proves you wrong and you’re not man enough to admit to having not understood something perfectly.)

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8238014/#:~:text=Studies have reported that prolonged,medications for non-pain symptoms.

https://americanaddictioncenters.org/alcohol/risks-effects-dangers/depression#:~:text=Alcohol can not only lead,reducing or stopping alcohol use.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9834328/

https://ajp.psychiatryonline.org/doi/abs/10.1176/ajp.138.11.1508?download=true&journalCode=ajp

https://ajp.psychiatryonline.org/doi/10.1176/ajp.2006.163.7.1149

You mean market socialism

“Hi, I’m Gabe”

Isn’t linked?

That’s just wrong. Correlation is a link. The long term high dose use of any CNS depressant correlates with actual depression (the psychological issue [I added the brackets because you seemed to miss when I specified the difference earlier.])

Oh wow, an anecdotal story, well that just proves what you’re saying is 100% correct.

Science couldn’t possibly disagree

“Pure” psychedelics like LSD and psilocybin rarely cause any sort of abuse, really, but I’ve been on a drug abuse closed ward and the manic people were generally in there because of CNS stimulants of all sorts. Psychedelics are just less likely to yield any long-lasting harmful effects compared to say smoking crack or snorting meth.

So yeah, while a CNS depressant isn’t the a thing that directly causes psychological depression as such, you can probably see how they’re linked from the following analogy; imagine that I tie your legs together. That doesn’t remove your ability to walk, per se, as long as you remove the restraints. But if no-one removes them for 50 years, do you think you’d walk as well as before?

In much the same way, yes, CNS depressants are linked to depression, and alcohol and benzos are the clearest examples.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8238014/#:~:text=Studies have reported that prolonged,medications for non-pain symptoms.

https://americanaddictioncenters.org/alcohol/risks-effects-dangers/depression#:~:text=Alcohol can not only lead,reducing or stopping alcohol use.

Abuse of any psychoactive drug on the regular leads to depression.

That’s a biased generalisation.

While abusers of psychedelics are rare, they’re generally manic and psychotic moreso than depressed.

Yes, depression can be caused by any addiction and abusing stims can cause a lack of neurotransmitter due to exhausting the resources for the body to do so.

It’s a bit different than using something that’s a direct depressant though.

Alcohol is a depressant my man.

Neurologically speaking, so in a different context, yeah, but neurological depression also seems to lead to actual depression, the mood disorder, which also show up as neurological depression.

We really need better imaging tools to measure neurotransmitter activity, would make for several advancements I’d say

Only to be CEO of a massive capitalist company.

I’ve heard a few tales of some CEO’s (of very small companies) here in the Nordics actually being generous to their employees. Like it’s most definitely a rarity, but I believe it is possible.

Like a CEO who values profits but values employees and paying their fair share more and isn’t blinded by greed and addicted to money. A socialist, literally. A market socialist, but a socialist nonetheless.

Everyone could have their basic needs met, and we could still have rich people. Just not filthy rich, not “rich-to-the-point-no-one-else-has-anything” rich.