3 ms·

Oh, FFS. 924(c) was enacted in 1968. I don't think the "anti-gun lobby" (as disingenuous and argument-poisoning a phrasing as "death tax" or "pro life", if you

by rosser 11y ago

Oh, FFS. 924(c) was enacted in 1968. I don't think the "anti-gun lobby" (as disingenuous and argument-poisoning a phrasing as "death tax" or "pro life", if you ask me) was much of a thing then, and even to the extent it did exist, it certainly wasn't anything like the thing that the "Mah cold, dead hands!" crowd reflexively vilifies today.

guelo 11y ago
I just looked it up. In 1970 924(c) was 1 year mandatory and 2 year for subsequent using or carrying a gun during a felony. In 1984 they changed it to 5 years for carrying a gun during a "crime of violence". 20 for subsequent. In 1986 they added " during a drug trafficking crime ". In 1998 in addition to use or carry they added "possesses" "in furtherance of any such crime." And they increased the subsequent minimum from 20 to 25. Note that these were all Republican congresses so i agree that the anti gun theory doesn't really hold that well, it was mostly just "tough on crime" hysteria. The 1986 drug stuff was in response to some basketball player, Len Bias, that died of an overdose.
- hga 11y ago
  Note that these were all Republican congresses Ummm, the House was held by the Democrats for all the dates you mention except 1998, the Senate for the first two https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Party_divisions_of_United_States_Congresses https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Party_divisions_of_United_Stat...). And you're wildly mistaken that party affiliations mapped that closely to official positions on guns till the 1990s, and to this day it's much easier to be an anti-gun Republicans like those now pretty much only found in NY or Illinois than, say, an anti-abortion Democrat.
- gonzo 11y ago
  > The 1986 drug stuff was in response to some basketball player, Len Bias, that died of an overdose. Some of us were already adults when that occurred. Fuck you, Nancy Reagan.
hga 11y ago
Here's a brief outline of the "anti-gun lobby's" successes in the US: Prior to the Civil War: bans on concealed carry ostensibly to discourage dueling. Post-Civil War: bans mostly in the South on carry, or types of weapons allowed to be carried, to keep blacks disarmed. Early 20ths Century: More widespread bans on carry, and restrictions on handgun ownership, prompted by the waves of non-Anglo-Saxon immigrants. New York's Sullivan Law, named after a gangster politician who disarmed his southern and eastern European rivals with it, is still the law of the land there. The National Firearms Act (NFA) of 1934 was the first national level gun control law, which as a "compromise" didn't effectively ban the transfer of handguns. Lots more where this came from with of course enforcement beyond the initially targeted populations, by the early '60s it was a big thing that Washington State passed a shall issue concealed carry licencing law. Big push in the '50s and '60s to restrict gun ownership, especially of handguns (I've read many contemporaneous issues of the NRA's American Rifleman membership magazine that covered the Congressional hearings etc. on this, generally lead by the criminal Senator Thomas Dodd, ah, I see he also got LSD banned: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_J._Dodd#Congress https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_J._Dodd#Congress). The Gun Control Act (GCA) of 1968 completely changed the way guns were sold in the US, opened the door for massive abuses by the BATF that were well on their way to extinguishing the country's gun culture when party reversed in 1986, etc. etc. etc. The anti-gun lobby was very much a thing that very year, the GCA pretty much marked the beginning of their greatest successes in the country. If we "reflexively" vilify the gun grabbers today, it's because it's been such a thing, and so strong for all of our adult lives for the majority of us (those of us less than 65 years old, including all Baby Boomers born starting in 1950, those of us less than 100 years old if you include that Federal effort to effectively ban handgun ownership with a $3,500 transfer tax in 2015 dollars).
- rosser 11y ago
  See, that's exactly what I'm talking about with argument-poisoning. When you spout rhetoric like "gun-grabbers", you're telegraphing not merely disinterest in, but active disdain for productive discourse. You're effectively telling me that don't want to discuss the issues, you just want to regurgitate propaganda, and name-call everyone who doesn't toe your party's line. I mean, I know this is contemporary America, where taking a considered, nuanced position on any hot-button political issue is just asking to be pilloried by both sides (because somehow, we have this quasi-magical ability to reduce every meaningful question to two antithetical camps who proceed to do nothing but insult one another), but we're supposed to be smarter and better than that here. Isn't that what nerds have prided themselves on for as long as nerds have been a thing, being smarter than everyone else?

by rosser 11y ago

guelo 11y ago

I just looked it up. In 1970 924(c) was 1 year mandatory and 2 year for subsequent using or carrying a gun during a felony. In 1984 they changed it to 5 years for carrying a gun during a "crime of violence". 20 for subsequent. In 1986 they added " during a drug trafficking crime ". In 1998 in addition to use or carry they added "possesses" "in furtherance of any such crime." And they increased the subsequent minimum from 20 to 25. Note that these were all Republican congresses so i agree that the anti gun theory doesn't really hold that well, it was mostly just "tough on crime" hysteria. The 1986 drug stuff was in response to some basketball player, Len Bias, that died of an overdose.

hga 11y ago
Note that these were all Republican congresses Ummm, the House was held by the Democrats for all the dates you mention except 1998, the Senate for the first two https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Party_divisions_of_United_States_Congresses https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Party_divisions_of_United_Stat...). And you're wildly mistaken that party affiliations mapped that closely to official positions on guns till the 1990s, and to this day it's much easier to be an anti-gun Republicans like those now pretty much only found in NY or Illinois than, say, an anti-abortion Democrat.
gonzo 11y ago
> The 1986 drug stuff was in response to some basketball player, Len Bias, that died of an overdose. Some of us were already adults when that occurred. Fuck you, Nancy Reagan.

hga 11y ago

Here's a brief outline of the "anti-gun lobby's" successes in the US: Prior to the Civil War: bans on concealed carry ostensibly to discourage dueling. Post-Civil War: bans mostly in the South on carry, or types of weapons allowed to be carried, to keep blacks disarmed. Early 20ths Century: More widespread bans on carry, and restrictions on handgun ownership, prompted by the waves of non-Anglo-Saxon immigrants. New York's Sullivan Law, named after a gangster politician who disarmed his southern and eastern European rivals with it, is still the law of the land there. The National Firearms Act (NFA) of 1934 was the first national level gun control law, which as a "compromise" didn't effectively ban the transfer of handguns. Lots more where this came from with of course enforcement beyond the initially targeted populations, by the early '60s it was a big thing that Washington State passed a shall issue concealed carry licencing law. Big push in the '50s and '60s to restrict gun ownership, especially of handguns (I've read many contemporaneous issues of the NRA's American Rifleman membership magazine that covered the Congressional hearings etc. on this, generally lead by the criminal Senator Thomas Dodd, ah, I see he also got LSD banned: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_J._Dodd#Congress https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_J._Dodd#Congress). The Gun Control Act (GCA) of 1968 completely changed the way guns were sold in the US, opened the door for massive abuses by the BATF that were well on their way to extinguishing the country's gun culture when party reversed in 1986, etc. etc. etc. The anti-gun lobby was very much a thing that very year, the GCA pretty much marked the beginning of their greatest successes in the country. If we "reflexively" vilify the gun grabbers today, it's because it's been such a thing, and so strong for all of our adult lives for the majority of us (those of us less than 65 years old, including all Baby Boomers born starting in 1950, those of us less than 100 years old if you include that Federal effort to effectively ban handgun ownership with a $3,500 transfer tax in 2015 dollars).

rosser 11y ago
See, that's exactly what I'm talking about with argument-poisoning. When you spout rhetoric like "gun-grabbers", you're telegraphing not merely disinterest in, but active disdain for productive discourse. You're effectively telling me that don't want to discuss the issues, you just want to regurgitate propaganda, and name-call everyone who doesn't toe your party's line. I mean, I know this is contemporary America, where taking a considered, nuanced position on any hot-button political issue is just asking to be pilloried by both sides (because somehow, we have this quasi-magical ability to reduce every meaningful question to two antithetical camps who proceed to do nothing but insult one another), but we're supposed to be smarter and better than that here. Isn't that what nerds have prided themselves on for as long as nerds have been a thing, being smarter than everyone else?