5 ms·

It has nothing to do with being the hero. People who are a good law abiding citizens should not be denied the right to own firearms because some people misbehav

It has nothing to do with being the hero. People who are a good law abiding citizens should not be denied the right to own firearms because some people misbehave. This is just a result of America’s individualist society. If we were collectivists we would ban guns for the good of society. But we’re not, and we never will be. We’re rugged individualists, for better or worse, and some people actively vote for things that make their lives worse just to uphold that value. It’s what America was built on. I don’t see a problem with it. It’s just a different way of life.

icebraining 9y ago
Very few Western countries actually ban guns. Sweden, for example, has 2M registered guns (21 for each 100 persons). Germany has 5.5M. In the Czech Republic you can get a PAR MK3 (local version of the AR15).
- matte_black 9y ago
  But can you own an AR-15?
  - eric_h 9y ago
    According to [0], it looks like you could even own the full auto military version (the M16). 0)https://www.sweden.org.za/gun-laws-in-sweden.html https://www.sweden.org.za/gun-laws-in-sweden.html
  - Natanael_L 9y ago
    The current laws in Sweden - the short version is that you need a justified reason (hunting or "shooting club"), you need to pass tests and not have a recent criminal record. Fully automatic weapons are much harder to get permits for than standard ones. https://polisen.se/lagar-och-regler/vapen-regler-och-tillstand/ https://polisen.se/lagar-och-regler/vapen-regler-och-tillsta...
- HarryHirsch 9y ago
  To the best of my knowledge in Germany it's mostly long guns for hunting, not handguns. To carry a handgun you'd need a permit and demonstrate your need to be armed.
kmonsen 9y ago
You are just a sheep parroting NRA and not a rugged individual. Citizens shooting back in a crisis only makes things worse, how do you know who is the real shooter now? Have you ever been in a shooting situation? If you are not trained for it it is terrifying and it is unlikely you will make a positive difference.
- sawjet 9y ago
  You're wrong. The guy who shot up church in Texas last year was stopped by an armed civilian with a rifle.
- dang 9y ago
  Personal attacks are not ok here, regardless of how wrong someone else is. Please don't comment like this again. Your comment would be fine without the first paragraph. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
  - kmonsen 9y ago
    I could have worded it differently, but I think it is important to point out that the rugged individual label does not apply to most Americans who live in cities and follow the herd. Also this was in a response to a building where I have many friends was attacked by an active shooter.
205guy 9y ago
I agree with your observations about the US (as an inhabitant myself), a lot of people forget or deny these points. I do disagree with your conclusions that it must stay this way, because I feel that on the gun issue, the resulting policies are leading to more guns in unqualified hands and more violence. I think there is space for rugged individualism and sane gun ownership requirements.
- drak0n1c 9y ago
  I think we're at a middle ground that is worse than either idealistic extreme (zero guns everywhere VS everyone trained and carrying). Having gun-free zones exist alongside available firearms has repeatedly resulted in mass shooters picking the least armed location. The eventual Pulse shooter scoped out the Disney parks but was discouraged by the guards. The presence of a few qualified people carrying is a deterrent that we shouldn't rule out, and it's not worth staffing police on every block like a police state. Perhaps a better combination might be legislation for sane gun ownership requirements combined with legislation limiting the proliferation of gun-free zones. That way vetted gun owners wouldn't be unarmed in the places in their community that they care about when they come up against a killer with no regard for rules.
watwut 9y ago
The same Americans were perfectly ok with draconian sentences for marijuana and other drugs. The same America is imprisoning most people among all countries oftentimes for surprisingly long time. You can get arrested for jaywalking or loitering, both of them being unimaginable to me. You have to keep your hands on wheel when cop stops you, lest cop can shoot you. Meanwhile, I can keep my hands where I want when cops stop me in a car. I am not sure individualism and freedom are good enough explanations.
cmurf 9y ago
Rugged individualism? This shooting happened in the middle of San Francisco. Your post is nonsensical Ayn Rand crap. You know what? She was a bad writer, her conclusions were all wrong, and in the end she cashed in her Social Security checks just like everyone else proving her own hypocrisy. In almost all meaningful ways Australians were living in the sticks more than Americans, and they had plenty of guns on the frontier, and now for the most part they don't because they're civilized. What you're defending is not individualism, but romanticism for a bygone era where the motto was you're either quick or you're dead. It's not ruggedness, it's an irrational fearful white bunny rabbit gun nut culture. I grew up in a family with guns: shotguns. Not handguns or assault weapons, both of which are for killing people.
- dang 9y ago
  This comment breaks the site guidelines noticeably worse than others in the thread. Please don't post ideological rants here and please edit out the name-calling. You've done this a ton and we've given you a ton of warnings. Eventually this leads to getting banned, so would you please (re-)read https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and use this site as intended from now on?
  - cmurf 9y ago
    There is zero name calling in this post. Only contra positions to glittering generalities that try to paint dementedness as handsomeness. I've received three warnings in the years I've posted hundreds of times. That is not in any rational way a ton. You are the only person who has ever picked on any of my posts. None of the posts you've ever complained about have had more than -2 karma at the time of the complaint and this one was at 0. Your position amounts to bullying: you are in a position of power, you cite vague guidelines and each time I've asked exactly which guideline and in what manner it's a violation you refused to answer. This is a might makes right tactic. I refuse to accept it as fair, or just, or right. And itself is inconsistent with those same guidelines. There will only be more challenges to such an absurd coddling of discourse that necessarily arise from highly charged events. There will be more such events. They will be even more ideological. That's why they occur and why people want to talk about them. When people post nonsense, I have always seen enough downvotes by the community to render such opinions moot by their invisibility. I see no purpose or logic in your claim. I have never opened a throw away account. This is my only account. All your threat does is tell me that was the actual mistake.

icebraining 9y ago

Very few Western countries actually ban guns. Sweden, for example, has 2M registered guns (21 for each 100 persons). Germany has 5.5M. In the Czech Republic you can get a PAR MK3 (local version of the AR15).

matte_black 9y ago
But can you own an AR-15?
- eric_h 9y ago
  According to [0], it looks like you could even own the full auto military version (the M16). 0)https://www.sweden.org.za/gun-laws-in-sweden.html https://www.sweden.org.za/gun-laws-in-sweden.html
- Natanael_L 9y ago
  The current laws in Sweden - the short version is that you need a justified reason (hunting or "shooting club"), you need to pass tests and not have a recent criminal record. Fully automatic weapons are much harder to get permits for than standard ones. https://polisen.se/lagar-och-regler/vapen-regler-och-tillstand/ https://polisen.se/lagar-och-regler/vapen-regler-och-tillsta...
HarryHirsch 9y ago
To the best of my knowledge in Germany it's mostly long guns for hunting, not handguns. To carry a handgun you'd need a permit and demonstrate your need to be armed.

kmonsen 9y ago

You are just a sheep parroting NRA and not a rugged individual. Citizens shooting back in a crisis only makes things worse, how do you know who is the real shooter now? Have you ever been in a shooting situation? If you are not trained for it it is terrifying and it is unlikely you will make a positive difference.

sawjet 9y ago
You're wrong. The guy who shot up church in Texas last year was stopped by an armed civilian with a rifle.
dang 9y ago
Personal attacks are not ok here, regardless of how wrong someone else is. Please don't comment like this again. Your comment would be fine without the first paragraph. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- kmonsen 9y ago
  I could have worded it differently, but I think it is important to point out that the rugged individual label does not apply to most Americans who live in cities and follow the herd. Also this was in a response to a building where I have many friends was attacked by an active shooter.

205guy 9y ago

I agree with your observations about the US (as an inhabitant myself), a lot of people forget or deny these points. I do disagree with your conclusions that it must stay this way, because I feel that on the gun issue, the resulting policies are leading to more guns in unqualified hands and more violence. I think there is space for rugged individualism and sane gun ownership requirements.

drak0n1c 9y ago
I think we're at a middle ground that is worse than either idealistic extreme (zero guns everywhere VS everyone trained and carrying). Having gun-free zones exist alongside available firearms has repeatedly resulted in mass shooters picking the least armed location. The eventual Pulse shooter scoped out the Disney parks but was discouraged by the guards. The presence of a few qualified people carrying is a deterrent that we shouldn't rule out, and it's not worth staffing police on every block like a police state. Perhaps a better combination might be legislation for sane gun ownership requirements combined with legislation limiting the proliferation of gun-free zones. That way vetted gun owners wouldn't be unarmed in the places in their community that they care about when they come up against a killer with no regard for rules.

watwut 9y ago

The same Americans were perfectly ok with draconian sentences for marijuana and other drugs. The same America is imprisoning most people among all countries oftentimes for surprisingly long time. You can get arrested for jaywalking or loitering, both of them being unimaginable to me. You have to keep your hands on wheel when cop stops you, lest cop can shoot you. Meanwhile, I can keep my hands where I want when cops stop me in a car. I am not sure individualism and freedom are good enough explanations.

cmurf 9y ago

Rugged individualism? This shooting happened in the middle of San Francisco. Your post is nonsensical Ayn Rand crap. You know what? She was a bad writer, her conclusions were all wrong, and in the end she cashed in her Social Security checks just like everyone else proving her own hypocrisy. In almost all meaningful ways Australians were living in the sticks more than Americans, and they had plenty of guns on the frontier, and now for the most part they don't because they're civilized. What you're defending is not individualism, but romanticism for a bygone era where the motto was you're either quick or you're dead. It's not ruggedness, it's an irrational fearful white bunny rabbit gun nut culture. I grew up in a family with guns: shotguns. Not handguns or assault weapons, both of which are for killing people.

dang 9y ago
This comment breaks the site guidelines noticeably worse than others in the thread. Please don't post ideological rants here and please edit out the name-calling. You've done this a ton and we've given you a ton of warnings. Eventually this leads to getting banned, so would you please (re-)read https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and use this site as intended from now on?
- cmurf 9y ago
  There is zero name calling in this post. Only contra positions to glittering generalities that try to paint dementedness as handsomeness. I've received three warnings in the years I've posted hundreds of times. That is not in any rational way a ton. You are the only person who has ever picked on any of my posts. None of the posts you've ever complained about have had more than -2 karma at the time of the complaint and this one was at 0. Your position amounts to bullying: you are in a position of power, you cite vague guidelines and each time I've asked exactly which guideline and in what manner it's a violation you refused to answer. This is a might makes right tactic. I refuse to accept it as fair, or just, or right. And itself is inconsistent with those same guidelines. There will only be more challenges to such an absurd coddling of discourse that necessarily arise from highly charged events. There will be more such events. They will be even more ideological. That's why they occur and why people want to talk about them. When people post nonsense, I have always seen enough downvotes by the community to render such opinions moot by their invisibility. I see no purpose or logic in your claim. I have never opened a throw away account. This is my only account. All your threat does is tell me that was the actual mistake.