4 ms·

> citizens need semiautomatic rifles How many do you plan to shoot?

0x8BADF00D 6y ago
CA has the castle doctrine, and many states have stand your ground laws. Nobody plans to shoot anyone, for self defense it is used as a last resort when an intruder continues to threaten the occupant.
- thephyber 6y ago
  > Nobody plans to shoot anyone So nobody has ever used a gun to commit first degree murder? I don't think you've thought through what you're typing.
  - 0x8BADF00D 6y ago
    That’s taken heavily out of context. Nobody plans to shoot someone when in a self-defense situation. Planning to use a gun to shoot someone is by definition a crime, and there is a burden of proof for that.
    - thephyber 6y ago
      Yes and no. I agree that you weren't talking about a 1st degree murder situation, but your wording is still sloppy and the idea you are conveying is inaccurate. > Nobody plans to shoot someone when in a self-defense situation Literally the only way your logic works is if you don't pick up a gun. If you pick up a gun, you are actively planning the possibility of a shoot. Perhaps you are making a mental distinction between shooting a specific person versus shooting any person you find in your house? > Planning to use a gun to shoot someone is by definition a crime, and there is a burden of proof for that. I think we are just sparring over the definition of "planning". Have a good day!
      - 0x8BADF00D 6y ago
        > If you pick up a gun, you are actively planning the possibility of a shoot. That is exactly what I stated earlier. Nobody is planning to shoot someone with malice aforethought in a self-defense scenario. As you say, they are planning for the possibility that they might shoot someone. Those are two very different things. > I think we are just sparring over the definition of "planning". Have a good day! It matters a lot in a legal context. If you state the assertion that “everyone who picks up a gun is planning to shoot someone”, then automatically everyone who ever picked up a gun is guilty of a very specific crime. The distinction matters a lot.
  - throwawaysea 6y ago
    I read his comment not in an absolute sense, but that most reasonable people do not want to ever use their firearm against another human. But they may encounter a situation that forces them to, and that defending their property/loved ones using a firearm is their right.
gotoeleven 6y ago
In a self defense situation who gets shot is up to the attackers.
- thephyber 6y ago
  You seem to misattribute perfect knowledge, control, aim, and rationality to a scared person with a gun. edit: some examples of scared shooters acting out of fear without enough information shoot people who are not "intruders": - Connecticut teacher mistakenly kills son after neighbor reports robber [1] - Ohio Father Fatally Shoots Son He Mistook for Intruder: Police [2] [1] https://www.cnn.com/2012/09/28/justice/connecticut-father-kills-son/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2012/09/28/justice/connecticut-father-ki... [2] https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/ohio-father-fatally-shoots-son-he-mistook-intruder-police-n495111 https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/ohio-father-fatally-sho...
  - gotoeleven 6y ago
    These imperfect people trying to defend themselves are easy to avoid, you just don't break into their property so that doesn't really seem like much of an issue.
  - gotoeleven 6y ago
    So people shouldn't be allowed to defend themselves because sometimes there are accidents? Should people be allowed to drive? After all, some people drive drunk. Should people even be allowed to go outside at all? After all, people get hit by meteors and lightning bolts.
    - mulmen 6y ago
      > In a self defense situation who gets shot is up to the attackers. "Accidents happen" disproves this assertion.
    - thephyber 6y ago
      > After all, some people drive drunk In my example, your drunk driver would be the shooter, not my the shooting victim. I'm very familiar with risk evaluation. This whole thread was because I was pointing out a big gap in your logic.
Krustopolis 6y ago
Semiautomatic means it reloads automatically. A bolt action, manual-reload rifle would be useless against a mob, which was the stated threat profile.
- throwawaysea 6y ago
  Yes, that was my thought process. I also don't own one but am definitely thinking about it now.
- thephyber 6y ago
  You seem to be on a different thread from your parent. I got from your parent "a semiautomatic rifle takes two hands to shoot, so how do you plan to shoot rifles?"
  - Krustopolis 6y ago
    Good point. With your comment for perspective I am now laughing at my interpretation. :)
downerending 6y ago
Well, we could have all citizens share the same rifle. Is that what you had in mind? More realistically, a good engineer will always have a backup.

CA has the castle doctrine, and many states have stand your ground laws. Nobody plans to shoot anyone, for self defense it is used as a last resort when an intruder continues to threaten the occupant.

thephyber 6y ago
> Nobody plans to shoot anyone So nobody has ever used a gun to commit first degree murder? I don't think you've thought through what you're typing.
- 0x8BADF00D 6y ago
  That’s taken heavily out of context. Nobody plans to shoot someone when in a self-defense situation. Planning to use a gun to shoot someone is by definition a crime, and there is a burden of proof for that.
  - thephyber 6y ago
    Yes and no. I agree that you weren't talking about a 1st degree murder situation, but your wording is still sloppy and the idea you are conveying is inaccurate. > Nobody plans to shoot someone when in a self-defense situation Literally the only way your logic works is if you don't pick up a gun. If you pick up a gun, you are actively planning the possibility of a shoot. Perhaps you are making a mental distinction between shooting a specific person versus shooting any person you find in your house? > Planning to use a gun to shoot someone is by definition a crime, and there is a burden of proof for that. I think we are just sparring over the definition of "planning". Have a good day!
    - 0x8BADF00D 6y ago
      > If you pick up a gun, you are actively planning the possibility of a shoot. That is exactly what I stated earlier. Nobody is planning to shoot someone with malice aforethought in a self-defense scenario. As you say, they are planning for the possibility that they might shoot someone. Those are two very different things. > I think we are just sparring over the definition of "planning". Have a good day! It matters a lot in a legal context. If you state the assertion that “everyone who picks up a gun is planning to shoot someone”, then automatically everyone who ever picked up a gun is guilty of a very specific crime. The distinction matters a lot.
- throwawaysea 6y ago
  I read his comment not in an absolute sense, but that most reasonable people do not want to ever use their firearm against another human. But they may encounter a situation that forces them to, and that defending their property/loved ones using a firearm is their right.

gotoeleven 6y ago

In a self defense situation who gets shot is up to the attackers.

thephyber 6y ago
You seem to misattribute perfect knowledge, control, aim, and rationality to a scared person with a gun. edit: some examples of scared shooters acting out of fear without enough information shoot people who are not "intruders": - Connecticut teacher mistakenly kills son after neighbor reports robber [1] - Ohio Father Fatally Shoots Son He Mistook for Intruder: Police [2] [1] https://www.cnn.com/2012/09/28/justice/connecticut-father-kills-son/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2012/09/28/justice/connecticut-father-ki... [2] https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/ohio-father-fatally-shoots-son-he-mistook-intruder-police-n495111 https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/ohio-father-fatally-sho...
- gotoeleven 6y ago
  These imperfect people trying to defend themselves are easy to avoid, you just don't break into their property so that doesn't really seem like much of an issue.
- gotoeleven 6y ago
  So people shouldn't be allowed to defend themselves because sometimes there are accidents? Should people be allowed to drive? After all, some people drive drunk. Should people even be allowed to go outside at all? After all, people get hit by meteors and lightning bolts.
  - mulmen 6y ago
    > In a self defense situation who gets shot is up to the attackers. "Accidents happen" disproves this assertion.
  - thephyber 6y ago
    > After all, some people drive drunk In my example, your drunk driver would be the shooter, not my the shooting victim. I'm very familiar with risk evaluation. This whole thread was because I was pointing out a big gap in your logic.

Krustopolis 6y ago

Semiautomatic means it reloads automatically. A bolt action, manual-reload rifle would be useless against a mob, which was the stated threat profile.

throwawaysea 6y ago
Yes, that was my thought process. I also don't own one but am definitely thinking about it now.
thephyber 6y ago
You seem to be on a different thread from your parent. I got from your parent "a semiautomatic rifle takes two hands to shoot, so how do you plan to shoot rifles?"
- Krustopolis 6y ago
  Good point. With your comment for perspective I am now laughing at my interpretation. :)

downerending 6y ago

Well, we could have all citizens share the same rifle. Is that what you had in mind? More realistically, a good engineer will always have a backup.