5 ms·

only the usa compares freedom with firearms ownership. this is slightly offtopic here.

by gcb0 8y ago

dfsegoat 8y ago
I made no such comparisons: I merely stated a fact to support the point re: Authoritarianism.
- stephen_g 8y ago
  There was huge democratic support for that though. To this day (well, at least in 2015), only 6% of Australians though our gun laws were too strong [1]. 1. http://www.essentialvision.com.au/gun-laws http://www.essentialvision.com.au/gun-laws
emilfihlman 8y ago
I mean, why shouldn't you have guns? As a counterpoint, gun culture (sports and hunting) is really strong here in Finland. Removing people's rights to do what they want is infringing on freedom, and often for no real purpose.
- robbiep 8y ago
  There’s a strong gun culture in Australia as well, and as an Australian, and a gun owner, I am perfectly fine with not being able to have an assault rifle. Because no one else can either, and schools don’t get shot up
  - uidjjdjje 8y ago
    Yeah no one else accept criminals and government agents. Both groups which time has herald as completely wise never failing institutions of freedom and safety. /s
  - chimeracoder 8y ago
    > There’s a strong gun culture in Australia as well, and as an Australian, and a gun owner, I am perfectly fine with not being able to have an assault rifle. Because no one else can either, and schools don’t get shot up Civilians in the US are not allowed to own assault rifles either, and haven't for decades. There are a tiny number of assault rifles in civilians' hands that were first sold over 30 years ago and were grandfathered in, but they are absurdly expensive (due to their rarity) and are generally owned by collectors.
    - DoubleCribble 8y ago
      Sure we can. It's the "A" in AR-15. What you're probably thinking of is "automatic".
      - drchap 8y ago
        The "A" in AR-15 stands for Armalite, the company where they were originally designed and manufactured. The first rifle they produced was the AR-1, a bolt-action rifle. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ArmaLite#Products https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ArmaLite#Products
    - cromulent 8y ago
      The terms are confusing for a non-American. My understanding is that in the USA you can't buy a "fully-automatic rifle", which is what the rest of the world calls a machine gun. Nor can you buy an "automatic weapon" which is a gun that looks like an automatic rifle. You can buy a semi-automatic AR-15, which can shoot 45 rounds or so per minute. As an Aussie, I'm also cool with not allowing people to have AR-15s. A round or two a minute should be enough for most people.
      - chimeracoder 8y ago
        > The terms are confusing for a non-American. The terms are not confusing. "Assault rifle" is a technical term with a precise definition. How a gun looks doesn't actually matter.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]

only the usa compares freedom with firearms ownership. this is slightly offtopic here.

by gcb0 8y ago

only the usa compares freedom with firearms ownership. this is slightly offtopic here.

dfsegoat 8y ago

I made no such comparisons: I merely stated a fact to support the point re: Authoritarianism.

stephen_g 8y ago
There was huge democratic support for that though. To this day (well, at least in 2015), only 6% of Australians though our gun laws were too strong [1]. 1. http://www.essentialvision.com.au/gun-laws http://www.essentialvision.com.au/gun-laws

emilfihlman 8y ago

I mean, why shouldn't you have guns? As a counterpoint, gun culture (sports and hunting) is really strong here in Finland. Removing people's rights to do what they want is infringing on freedom, and often for no real purpose.

robbiep 8y ago
There’s a strong gun culture in Australia as well, and as an Australian, and a gun owner, I am perfectly fine with not being able to have an assault rifle. Because no one else can either, and schools don’t get shot up
- uidjjdjje 8y ago
  Yeah no one else accept criminals and government agents. Both groups which time has herald as completely wise never failing institutions of freedom and safety. /s
- chimeracoder 8y ago
  > There’s a strong gun culture in Australia as well, and as an Australian, and a gun owner, I am perfectly fine with not being able to have an assault rifle. Because no one else can either, and schools don’t get shot up Civilians in the US are not allowed to own assault rifles either, and haven't for decades. There are a tiny number of assault rifles in civilians' hands that were first sold over 30 years ago and were grandfathered in, but they are absurdly expensive (due to their rarity) and are generally owned by collectors.
  - DoubleCribble 8y ago
    Sure we can. It's the "A" in AR-15. What you're probably thinking of is "automatic".
    - drchap 8y ago
      The "A" in AR-15 stands for Armalite, the company where they were originally designed and manufactured. The first rifle they produced was the AR-1, a bolt-action rifle. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ArmaLite#Products https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ArmaLite#Products
  - cromulent 8y ago
    The terms are confusing for a non-American. My understanding is that in the USA you can't buy a "fully-automatic rifle", which is what the rest of the world calls a machine gun. Nor can you buy an "automatic weapon" which is a gun that looks like an automatic rifle. You can buy a semi-automatic AR-15, which can shoot 45 rounds or so per minute. As an Aussie, I'm also cool with not allowing people to have AR-15s. A round or two a minute should be enough for most people.
    - chimeracoder 8y ago
      > The terms are confusing for a non-American. The terms are not confusing. "Assault rifle" is a technical term with a precise definition. How a gun looks doesn't actually matter.
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]