Random political thought thread.

[Totenkindly]

Gun ownership is extremely concentrated. It would not be that difficult.

Maybe you would like to address the issues I actually raised. Gun issues are different in different areas, and ownership of certain types of guns are actually important to the way of life for certain areas of the country (for example, locations that depends on guns used to provide food for certain families, protecting property against predatory animals, or offering people protection in areas where there is not a mobile police force that can respond quickly to problems). This is one reason why you are not going to make headway on the "NO GUNS OF ANY TYPE FOR ANYONE" issue. These issues are different than "guy with high capacity magazine shoots up an urban/suburban area" or "uncontrolled handgun is used to shoot someone unexpectedly."

 

[Lexicon]

Maybe you would like to address the issues I actually raised. Gun issues are different in different areas, and ownership of certain types of guns are actually important to the way of life for certain areas of the country (for example, locations that depends on guns used to provide food for certain families, protecting property against predatory animals, or offering people protection in areas where there is not a mobile police force that can respond quickly to problems). This is one reason why you are not going to make headway on the "NO GUNS OF ANY TYPE FOR ANYONE" issue. These issues are different than "guy with high capacity magazine shoots up an urban/suburban area" or "uncontrolled handgun is used to shoot someone unexpectedly."

I think at the very least, a nationwide ban on assault rifles of any kind would be a huge step forward. Those are useless for hunting, get hot to the touch quickly, & are generally unwieldy for any kind reasonable home defense. Their only ‘practical’ use is trained military combat, or mass murder where you’re spraying people w/bullets indiscriminately. There is no good reason for the average person to own one. A high caliber pistol or a hunting rifle to ward off grizzly bears? Sure. Anything more is excess.

But considering how much pushback there was when bump-stocks were banned after that bloodbath in Vegas, I’m not expecting much in terms of reform.

 

[Totenkindly]

I think at the very least, a nationwide ban on assault rifles of any kind would be a huge step forward. Those are useless for hunting, get hot to the touch quickly, & are generally unwieldy for any kind reasonable home defense. Their only ‘practical’ use is trained military combat, or mass murder where you’re spraying people w/bullets indiscriminately. There is no good reason for the average person to own one. A high caliber pistol or a hunting rifle to ward off grizzly bears? Sure. Anything more is excess.

But considering how much pushback there was when bump-stocks were banned after that bloodbath in Vegas, I’m not expecting much in terms of reform.

I think that is one of the foremost problems that needs to be addressed. Trying to expand it to other things with more legitimate purpose just makes it unlikely even that will be addressed.

I don't really get why the AR15 problem hasn't been addressed or why there is so much pushback. I might play RPGs and video games, but I feel like I have more of a sense of realism than the fever dreams of folks who need to parade around with assault rifles. Lindsey Graham is a joke.

 

[Kephalos]

Maybe you would like to address the issues I actually raised. Gun issues are different in different areas, and ownership of certain types of guns are actually important to the way of life for certain areas of the country (for example, locations that depends on guns used to provide food for certain families, protecting property against predatory animals, or offering people protection in areas where there is not a mobile police force that can respond quickly to problems). This is one reason why you are not going to make headway on the "NO GUNS OF ANY TYPE FOR ANYONE" issue. These issues are different than "guy with high capacity magazine shoots up an urban/suburban area" or "uncontrolled handgun is used to shoot someone unexpectedly."

How about this? Start with: No guns for anyone as the default position. THEN carve out some special justified exceptions. The default position is no guns and then you have some exceptions. Instead of arguing over what guns should be banned to what persons and for what uses, you would need to justify why allow what firearms to what kind of persons for what uses.

The so-called gun control that is being proposed is that the default is anyone has a right to a gun and there are some exceptions where certain weapons are banned and certain persons are prohibited from having guns.

See the difference?

 

[The Cat]

the media needs to stop misusing gun terms; that would go a long way to make gun owners less nervous...

 

[The Cat]

 

[SD45T-2]

I think at the very least, a nationwide ban on assault rifles of any kind would be a huge step forward. Those are useless for hunting, get hot to the touch quickly, & are generally unwieldy for any kind reasonable home defense. Their only ‘practical’ use is trained military combat, or mass murder where you’re spraying people w/bullets indiscriminately. There is no good reason for the average person to own one. A high caliber pistol or a hunting rifle to ward off grizzly bears? Sure. Anything more is excess.

But considering how much pushback there was when bump-stocks were banned after that bloodbath in Vegas, I’m not expecting much in terms of reform.

There was a national assault weapons ban in effect from 1994 to 2004. The implementation of it didn't have much discernible impact on crime, and neither did its expiration. According to the FBI UCR, handguns account for the vast majority of gun murders per year. Rifles of any kind account for roughly 0.03%. FBI — Expanded Homicide Data Table 8

Technically speaking, an AR-style rifle doesn't really do anything you can't do with a Mini-14. And if you take a civilian-legal (not select-fire) AK receiver and put a traditional stock on it, it's legal in California, just so long as you don't use magazines with a capacity greater than 10 rounds. I've shot one.

Banning bumpstocks was pretty logical considering that it was already otherwise illegal to use a piece of hardware to make a gun go cyclic when you hold the trigger down.

I think that is one of the foremost problems that needs to be addressed. Trying to expand it to other things with more legitimate purpose just makes it unlikely even that will be addressed.

I don't really get why the AR15 problem hasn't been addressed or why there is so much pushback. I might play RPGs and video games, but I feel like I have more of a sense of realism than the fever dreams of folks who need to parade around with assault rifles. Lindsey Graham is a joke.

I find the popularity of things in the AR family to be little odd. It's an antiquated design dating back to the 1950s and it seems like something with a gas piston would be more desirable than direct impingement. My dad was kind of partial to the FAL.

 

[Lexicon]

There was a national assault weapons ban in effect from 1994 to 2004. The implementation of it didn't have much discernible impact on crime, and neither did its expiration. According to the FBI UCR, handguns account for the vast majority of gun murders per year. Rifles of any kind account for roughly 0.03%. FBI — Expanded Homicide Data Table 8

Technically speaking, an AR-style rifle doesn't really do anything you can't do with a Mini-14. And if you take a civilian-legal (not select-fire) AK receiver and put a traditional stock on it, it's legal in California, just so long as you don't use magazines with a capacity greater than 10 rounds. I've shot one.

Banning bumpstocks was pretty logical considering that it was already otherwise illegal to use a piece of hardware to make a gun go cyclic when you hold the trigger down.

I find the popularity of things in the AR family to be little odd. It's an antiquated design dating back to the 1950s and it seems like something with a gas piston would be more desirable than direct impingement. My dad was kind of partial to the FAL.

Yeah, I confess that I’m not terribly well-read in the firearms department, so I may be using the wrong (or limited) terms to describe what I mean.

I’ve been hunting before, shot a .30-06 many times. I’ve shot a 9mm pistol & a .357 magnum revolver at a firing range. One of my ex’s friends had an AK-47, which I also fired at the range. You can just put that thing to your hip & spray— it’s ridiculous. Just from that experience, basically any gun that can fire a massive amount of ammo in seconds is completely unnecessary outside of a military combat situation. Any modifiers you can put on a gun to make it capable of that are also excessive. So, that’s the type of firearm I’m trying to describe that should be banned. If that makes sense.

(Personally, a good hunting rifle is probably all someone needs for a big wild animal or a home invasion, if they live way out in the sticks. I think in most cases, just hearing that hallmark cocking sound of the rifle would be enough to scare off most burglars)

 

[SD45T-2]

Yeah, I confess that I’m not terribly well-read in the firearms department, so I may be using the wrong (or limited) terms to describe what I mean.

I’ve been hunting before, shot a .30-06 many times. I’ve shot a 9mm pistol & a .357 magnum revolver at a firing range. One of my ex’s friends had an AK-47, which I also fired at the range. You can just put that thing to your hip & spray— it’s ridiculous. Just from that experience, basically any gun that can fire a massive amount of ammo in seconds is completely unnecessary outside of a military combat situation. Any modifiers you can put on a gun to make it capable of that are also excessive. So, that’s the type of firearm I’m trying to describe that should be banned. If that makes sense.

He had a full auto one? That's fairly special. And I remember getting to try a friend's M1 Garand. He was like "That's not bad for .30-06 is it?" and I was like . Shotguns can be pretty useful for home defense, although the recoil can be a downside. That can be mitigated some with reduced recoil loads or having something semiauto, which absorbs some of it.

Us Americans are violent and messy people generally. IIRC we beat, stab, and strangle each other to death at a rate significantly higher than Canada and western Europe.

 

[Lexicon]

He had a full auto one? That's fairly special. And I remember getting to try a friend's M1 Garand. He was like "That's not bad for .30-06 is it?" and I was like . Shotguns can be pretty useful for home defense, although the recoil can be a downside. That can be mitigated some with reduced recoil loads or having something semiauto, which absorbs some of it.

Us Americans are violent and messy people generally. IIRC we beat, stab, and strangle each other to death at a rate significantly higher than Canada and western Europe.

Yeah, it was a fully automatic one. It was ridiculously easy for him to get it, too.

And, agreed. We are a nation of brutal, broken idiots.

Lindsey Graham is a joke.

But he’s going to shoot GANGS with his AR-15! GANGS!!

What a cartoon.

 

[SD45T-2]

Yeah, it was a fully automatic one. It was ridiculously easy for him to get it, too.

And, agreed. We are a nation of brutal, broken idiots.

I think my main criticism with Idiocracy is that Mike Judge set it too far in the future. 2055 would have made more sense than 2505.

 

[Lexicon]

I think my main criticism with Idiocracy is that Mike Judge set it too far in the future. 2055 would have made more sense than 2505.

No time like the present for... way too much of that movie than I’d really like to think about.

 

[The Cat]

I think my main criticism with Idiocracy is that Mike Judge set it too far in the future. 2055 would have made more sense than 2505.

Back in those days people were more optimistic.

 

[The Cat]

Lindsey Graham is a joke.

A well paid and consistently elected self hating joke. A killing Joke if you like.

 

[Totenkindly]

A well paid and consistently elected self hating joke. A killing Joke if you like.

More like a bad joke, but... different strokes, different folks...

 

[The Cat]

More like a bad joke, but... different strokes, different folks...

I dont like him, he creeps me out.

 

[Totenkindly]

I dont like him, he creeps me out.

 

[The Cat]

He radiates fear like a beacon depserately fired off by a man who knows its only a matter of time before he's rent asunder by an angry mob of something. Makes him dangerous. Like a Gollum. Minus the plucky charm.

 

[Totenkindly]

He radiates fear like a beacon depserately fired off by a man who knows its only a matter of time before he's rent asunder by an angry mob of something. Makes him dangerous. Like a Gollum. Minus the plucky charm.

Did you hear that, my precious? he called Smeagol plucky. PLUCKY! Plucked like a chicken, oh we do love juicy chicken and bits, don't we, my precious, don't we?

we must go ruffle nasssty lindsey's feathers, now, mustn't we, my precious?

 

[The Cat]

Did you hear that, my precious? he called Smeagol plucky. PLUCKY! Plucked like a chicken, oh we do love juicy chicken and bits, don't we, my precious, don't we?

we must go ruffle nasssty lindsey's feathers, now, mustn't we, my precious?

"You know what my precious? Yes, yes, I believe that sounds like a grand idea...Let's do that." -Smeagol, at some point logically said that to himself.