4 ms·

> But, still, I sometimes wonder why there is such a hard push for more gun-control laws every year given this decreasing level of domestic violence. Another t

by etendue 10y ago

> But, still, I sometimes wonder why there is such a hard push for more gun-control laws every year given this decreasing level of domestic violence. Another thing to ponder is why the focus on semiautomatic rifles, when 1, violent crime overwhelmingly uses handguns, and 2, the previous assault weapon ban was deemed ineffective by the DOJ. And what is the basis for proposing expanded background checks in response to, for example, the Orlando mass shooting when the shooter not only passed a background check, but had a security guard license (which itself has a more intensive background check).

zghst 10y ago
Same politicians accusing others using fear and ignorance seem to be using fear and ignorance vigorously
bbradley406 10y ago
While I dislike describing these things ("He's a gun nut! He'll kill us! People like him should be locked up!" are common reactions to simple facts) there are multiple reasons rifles are lumped in. - Any additional regulation sounds like progress to voters in favor of it. It can be nonsensical, unenforceable, make criminals out of previously law-abiding citizens (CA magazine size laws), be disregarded publicly by police departments, and they will still cheer for it. - They are mostly used for target practice, hunting, pest control, and some home defense. People who vote for gun control typically don't do these things. Questions of the form "Why do you need (X number of rounds | optics | calibers | forward grips)?" sound reasonable to them; if you have ever faced a bear / pack of coyotes / intruders it's pretty self explanatory. - They are the only real firearms that can present a significant threat to trained teams. Rifles can be aimed precisely, deliver a good sustained rate of fire, and punch through body armor, all from 500 yards. - With a good amount of practice and .308-.50 rounds, you can take down opposing vehicles and assets (power stations, fuel tanks, etc), and have enough distance between you and the target to exit the area safely. For those in favor of gun control (beyond what we have currently) on HN, let me ask: How well do you think you would fair in a large riot / national emergency / civil war armed with only a SAFE Act compliant handgun? These things do and will happen, maybe not in your lifetime, but certainly in the future. The laws we enact should not just be focused on making us feel safe. They should consider those that may have to justly defend themselves against a larger force.

by etendue 10y ago

zghst 10y ago

Same politicians accusing others using fear and ignorance seem to be using fear and ignorance vigorously

bbradley406 10y ago

While I dislike describing these things ("He's a gun nut! He'll kill us! People like him should be locked up!" are common reactions to simple facts) there are multiple reasons rifles are lumped in. - Any additional regulation sounds like progress to voters in favor of it. It can be nonsensical, unenforceable, make criminals out of previously law-abiding citizens (CA magazine size laws), be disregarded publicly by police departments, and they will still cheer for it. - They are mostly used for target practice, hunting, pest control, and some home defense. People who vote for gun control typically don't do these things. Questions of the form "Why do you need (X number of rounds | optics | calibers | forward grips)?" sound reasonable to them; if you have ever faced a bear / pack of coyotes / intruders it's pretty self explanatory. - They are the only real firearms that can present a significant threat to trained teams. Rifles can be aimed precisely, deliver a good sustained rate of fire, and punch through body armor, all from 500 yards. - With a good amount of practice and .308-.50 rounds, you can take down opposing vehicles and assets (power stations, fuel tanks, etc), and have enough distance between you and the target to exit the area safely. For those in favor of gun control (beyond what we have currently) on HN, let me ask: How well do you think you would fair in a large riot / national emergency / civil war armed with only a SAFE Act compliant handgun? These things do and will happen, maybe not in your lifetime, but certainly in the future. The laws we enact should not just be focused on making us feel safe. They should consider those that may have to justly defend themselves against a larger force.