3 ms·
After the Paris terrorist attack EU seeks to restrict legal firearms
- alessioalex 11y agoDo people really have to use firearms for self-defense? Is it that crucial? Can't they just use non-lethal stuff?
- pareidolia 11y agoJust to get an impression: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shooting_at_the_Summer_Olympics https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shooting_at_the_Summer_Olympic... Don't make the assumption that everything air-powered is nonlethal. Indeed in history we find: "In the late 1700's, powerful pneumatic guns even found their way into the ranks of the military. The Austrian Army had an entire regiment armed with .44 caliber repeating air rifles. All surviving accounts indicate that the Austrians used those airguns with deadly effectiveness against Napoleon's army. So feared, any Austrian soldier captured with an air rifle was summarily executed as an assassin!" (http://www.airguns.net/general_airgun_history.php http://www.airguns.net/general_airgun_history.php)
- Piskvorrr 11y agoBecause the terrorists had their AK-47s legally. Wouldn't it just be easier to put up a sign "no entry to terrorists"? Then they'd have to just shrug and go away. (Assuming that criminals are law-abiding. Ahem.)
- celticninja 11y agoYay another thread where people argue over gun laws. 2 comments in and already one sarcastic response.
- tired_man 11y agoWell of course they are. Everyone knows that shotguns purchased in stores are much more dangerous than AK-47s purchased from a smuggler in a back alley.