3 ms·
The majority of people live in urban centers. One of the biggest difficulties in modern America is bridging the urban/rural divide: My father, living in a rur
by ISL 7y ago
The majority of people live in urban centers.
One of the biggest difficulties in modern America is bridging the urban/rural divide:
My father, living in a rural area, purchased a shotgun for home defense -- when 911 was accidentally dialed, the sheriff's response time was roughly 30 minutes. Their primary political concerns revolve around taxes and regulation. Sometimes a bear walks through the neighbor's yard.
At our house in the city, on the other hand, I can throw five burritos and hit five other residences. I can't imagine firing that same shotgun in our house, as our windows and our neighbor's windows are in direct opposition. Police response times are quick, but we have people camping in the bushes across the street, a car break-in thrice a decade, and the occasional heroin addict passed out in the park, needle still in his arm.
These are two entirely different modalities of living, and we are trying to apply federal law to both. The second amendment is essential to our democracy, but it is increasingly difficult to argue with the growing calls to address gun violence as a public health threat. Nobody wants to get shot, everyone wants to live free and out from under the thumb of a tyrannical government. We can find a way.
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- aidenn0 7y agoA shotgun is actually pretty reasonable Urban defense, particularly with lead shot that isn't too large. Rifles are a big no no though. They can carry very far and overpenetrate.
- ISL 7y agoI've been contemplating bear spray to fill that role. Deployed in the confines of our home, it would put both us and any assailant in a world of hurt, but nobody has to die (and, if turned against us, we might suffer far less). Even bird shot, fired from within our house, could easily kill our nearest neighbors. They're less than 10m away, and separated only by plate glass. The buckshot that my father has selected for home defense could easily reach them through their interior walls. I've already dealt with enough death in life.
- surge 7y agoIf the assailant is armed, they can still fire at you. It won't really work. If a criminal can shoot back or attack after getting shot, especially one that is high, mace isn't going to do it, just ask law enforcement. Criminals will always have access to guns despite the law.
- galangalalgol 7y agoVirginia had. Lot of success with limiting the number of purhases per month to cut back on strawman purchases. It made a statistical drop in gun violence. To truly combat that or mass shootings we need to address the why, not the how. And that isn't better psych car and red flag laws. Psychologists admit freely they can't distinguish between those who will harm people in mass shootings and the multitude of others with similar personalities. It has to be about asking what in our society prompts people to harm themselves or others and reducing those stressors. Again, why, not how or who.