5 ms·

Yes, they are irrational. An AR Pattern rifle chambered in a rimfire cartridge such as 22 LR is legal under "Assault Weapon" ban laws. Rimfire rifles have been

by 28226 7y ago

Yes, they are irrational. An AR Pattern rifle chambered in a rimfire cartridge such as 22 LR is legal under "Assault Weapon" ban laws. Rimfire rifles have been used in spree shootings. What's the argument for why ergonomic features like an adjustable stocks should be banned?

tptacek 7y ago
They shouldn't. But you won't like what I have to say next: that's because the rational target for regulation should be any semi-automatic rifle with a detachable magazine. And (I'm relating a fact here): that's what the original proposals were. We don't ban cosmetic features because legislators are stupid; we ban them because the firearms lobby is powerful, and scrambled the original proposals. (Again: I think another problem with firearms regulations is that they've been based on bans, when what's in fact needed is licensure --- in the US, for historical reasons, probably presumptively-issued licenses).
- 28226 7y ago
  I appreciate your honesty, it's rare in discussions like this. Do you want semi-automatic handguns to be regulated the same way as semi-automatic long guns? Exactly what problem would licensure solve?
  - tptacek 7y ago
    Keeping high-powered weaponry out of the hands of complete and total fuckups, who dominate the list of spree shooters with high casualty counts. And potentially mitigating (obviously not solving) proliferation. Within Constitutional limits (and without wading into a protracted argument about what those limits might be; Heller was 5-4!), devolving this question back out to the states, so states that overwhelmingly support restrictions regain some knobs to accomplish that (through licensure requirements). Letting the Laboratories of Democracy do their thing. I don't see a fundamental reason why we'd want to take most semi-automatic rifles away from most owners, because while I don't actually believe most owners derive any practical benefits from them (I think overwhelmingly they're a hobby, not a tool), I also don't see what the point of reclaiming a firearm from someone who simply isn't going to abuse it would be.
    - 28226 7y ago
      Does a semi-automatic handgun qualify as "high-powered weaponry?" The "Laboratories of Democracy" idea is unrealistic for firearms, and most issues. States don't control their borders. Though, it's against federal law to buy a handgun from an FFL out of state and a long gun can only be purchased out of state if said long gun is legal in a buyer's home state. In general, do you think that gun crimes (e.g. possession of a firearm by a felon) are adequately prosecuted? I'm not interested in talking about the US Constitution. We both already know each other's arguments. I'm not even interested in changing your opinion. I'm a lurker, but I've read your comments for years and respect you. The logistics of your ideal scenario interest me. Canada gave up on registering long guns because it was infeasible. Would you support a law requiring background checks for all purchase of firearms under the condition that the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) is made available for all citizens to use (not just FFLs), free of charge, using a driver's license number of the potential purchaser? Do you think that the progression of low-cost CNC machines, such as the Ghost Gunner, is a hurdle for the gun control measures that you want implemented? The serialized lower receiver is what is considered a firearm in America. Do you want to regulate all firearm components, such as barrels, handguards, etc?
      - tptacek 7y ago
        No, semi-automatic handguns would not. The idea that state-by-state (or, just as likely, county-by-county) gun regulations couldn't work flies against reality; they won't keep criminals from bringing guns in, of course, but no regulation will, and that's not the intent. I'm less interested in the general crime argument. We're not having school shooting drills because of gang shootouts in Camden. Prosecution of gun crimes is unlikely to be the intervention that solves that problem. I generally support all viable gun control proposals; background checks are fine, but won't really address the proliferation and mass casualty problems. I absolutely do not believe, even a little bit, than amateur gunsmithing is a meaningful factor in gun policy. I understand that the receiver is, legally, the important part of an assault rifle; I don't so much care about firearm components. As I've said elsewhere, I'm also not generally interested in confiscation of firearms; most people who own them should be able to keep them. Ironically, with licensure, we could probably eliminate a lot of weird NFA regulation as well.
  - nextlevelwizard 7y ago
    >Do you want semi-automatic handguns to be regulated the same way as semi-automatic long guns? All fire arms should require a licensed operator. >Exactly what problem would licensure solve? It would keep guns in the hands of responsible, law-abiding people. We've collectively decided that to be fit to drive a car you need to take classes on how to drive it and you have to have a valid license. Why this doesn't apply to guns is beyond me. People shouldn't be able to buy guns without knowing how they work, how to maintain, and how to operate them.
    - HBKXNCUO 7y ago
      >Why this doesn't apply to guns is beyond me. Because people aren't concerned that in a decade or three, politicians are going to use the registry of motor vehicle licenses to help them in confiscating motor vehicles from normal people who want to keep them around in order to protect their families.
      - tptacek 7y ago
        Which is of course irrational; motor vehicle licensure is far more powerfully coercive and has more public policy goals than firearms licensure. The political psychology point is well taken, of course; the problem with all gun control proposals in the US is that they're perceived, with some validity, to be a slippery slope towards universal confiscation, the same way abortion regulation is perceived as a slippery slope to a universal ban. But in the airless vacuum of a message board we should be able to discuss the proposals on their merits without being chained to partisan political analyses.
        HBKXNCUO 7y ago
        By suggesting their concerns are irrational, are you saying you think it's more likely that registries of vehicle licenses are going to be used to perform vehicle confiscations than that registries of firearm licenses are going to be used to perform firearm confiscations?
        7y ago

by 28226 7y ago

tptacek 7y ago

They shouldn't. But you won't like what I have to say next: that's because the rational target for regulation should be any semi-automatic rifle with a detachable magazine. And (I'm relating a fact here): that's what the original proposals were. We don't ban cosmetic features because legislators are stupid; we ban them because the firearms lobby is powerful, and scrambled the original proposals. (Again: I think another problem with firearms regulations is that they've been based on bans, when what's in fact needed is licensure --- in the US, for historical reasons, probably presumptively-issued licenses).

28226 7y ago
I appreciate your honesty, it's rare in discussions like this. Do you want semi-automatic handguns to be regulated the same way as semi-automatic long guns? Exactly what problem would licensure solve?
- tptacek 7y ago
  Keeping high-powered weaponry out of the hands of complete and total fuckups, who dominate the list of spree shooters with high casualty counts. And potentially mitigating (obviously not solving) proliferation. Within Constitutional limits (and without wading into a protracted argument about what those limits might be; Heller was 5-4!), devolving this question back out to the states, so states that overwhelmingly support restrictions regain some knobs to accomplish that (through licensure requirements). Letting the Laboratories of Democracy do their thing. I don't see a fundamental reason why we'd want to take most semi-automatic rifles away from most owners, because while I don't actually believe most owners derive any practical benefits from them (I think overwhelmingly they're a hobby, not a tool), I also don't see what the point of reclaiming a firearm from someone who simply isn't going to abuse it would be.
  - 28226 7y ago
    Does a semi-automatic handgun qualify as "high-powered weaponry?" The "Laboratories of Democracy" idea is unrealistic for firearms, and most issues. States don't control their borders. Though, it's against federal law to buy a handgun from an FFL out of state and a long gun can only be purchased out of state if said long gun is legal in a buyer's home state. In general, do you think that gun crimes (e.g. possession of a firearm by a felon) are adequately prosecuted? I'm not interested in talking about the US Constitution. We both already know each other's arguments. I'm not even interested in changing your opinion. I'm a lurker, but I've read your comments for years and respect you. The logistics of your ideal scenario interest me. Canada gave up on registering long guns because it was infeasible. Would you support a law requiring background checks for all purchase of firearms under the condition that the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) is made available for all citizens to use (not just FFLs), free of charge, using a driver's license number of the potential purchaser? Do you think that the progression of low-cost CNC machines, such as the Ghost Gunner, is a hurdle for the gun control measures that you want implemented? The serialized lower receiver is what is considered a firearm in America. Do you want to regulate all firearm components, such as barrels, handguards, etc?
    - tptacek 7y ago
      No, semi-automatic handguns would not. The idea that state-by-state (or, just as likely, county-by-county) gun regulations couldn't work flies against reality; they won't keep criminals from bringing guns in, of course, but no regulation will, and that's not the intent. I'm less interested in the general crime argument. We're not having school shooting drills because of gang shootouts in Camden. Prosecution of gun crimes is unlikely to be the intervention that solves that problem. I generally support all viable gun control proposals; background checks are fine, but won't really address the proliferation and mass casualty problems. I absolutely do not believe, even a little bit, than amateur gunsmithing is a meaningful factor in gun policy. I understand that the receiver is, legally, the important part of an assault rifle; I don't so much care about firearm components. As I've said elsewhere, I'm also not generally interested in confiscation of firearms; most people who own them should be able to keep them. Ironically, with licensure, we could probably eliminate a lot of weird NFA regulation as well.
- nextlevelwizard 7y ago
  >Do you want semi-automatic handguns to be regulated the same way as semi-automatic long guns? All fire arms should require a licensed operator. >Exactly what problem would licensure solve? It would keep guns in the hands of responsible, law-abiding people. We've collectively decided that to be fit to drive a car you need to take classes on how to drive it and you have to have a valid license. Why this doesn't apply to guns is beyond me. People shouldn't be able to buy guns without knowing how they work, how to maintain, and how to operate them.
  - HBKXNCUO 7y ago
    >Why this doesn't apply to guns is beyond me. Because people aren't concerned that in a decade or three, politicians are going to use the registry of motor vehicle licenses to help them in confiscating motor vehicles from normal people who want to keep them around in order to protect their families.
    - tptacek 7y ago
      Which is of course irrational; motor vehicle licensure is far more powerfully coercive and has more public policy goals than firearms licensure. The political psychology point is well taken, of course; the problem with all gun control proposals in the US is that they're perceived, with some validity, to be a slippery slope towards universal confiscation, the same way abortion regulation is perceived as a slippery slope to a universal ban. But in the airless vacuum of a message board we should be able to discuss the proposals on their merits without being chained to partisan political analyses.
      - HBKXNCUO 7y ago
        By suggesting their concerns are irrational, are you saying you think it's more likely that registries of vehicle licenses are going to be used to perform vehicle confiscations than that registries of firearm licenses are going to be used to perform firearm confiscations?
        7y ago