2 ms·

They are unsafe because they routinely cause weapon malfunctions. Trying to clear two rounds stacked into each other is dangerous and can cause a negligent disc

by Alupis 6y ago

They are unsafe because they routinely cause weapon malfunctions. Trying to clear two rounds stacked into each other is dangerous and can cause a negligent discharge. Certain types of cartridges are even more susceptible to problems stemming from feed malfunctions, such as "Setback" in .40 S&W, which can turn your handgun into a hand grenade with no warning. Basically, your argument seems to be, guns can be dangerous if used improperly, therefore a magazine that was modified to meet some arbitrary requirement and causes routine malfunctions isn't a problem? That's absurd. When you examine violent gun related crime - it is simply not law abiding citizens causing the problems. It simply is not. It's gang shootings, and murders that dominate gun violence. Two things that will not stop if you magically removed all guns. You must be realistic, otherwise you're arguing from a disingenuous position. California - and particularly Los Angeles - has some of the most strict gun policy in the country! Yet... are responsible for most of the gun violence in the nation. How do you explain that away? Is it a bunch of law abiding citizens committing all that violence? No it is not. > The wide and easy availability of guns ostensibly destined for the hands of otherwise lawful gun owners is a big factor in what makes all this extreme violence possible Really? One of the most commonly seized gang shooting-related firearms in California is the TEC-9, a gun that's been illegal to purchase since the 80's. No "otherwise lawful gun owner" has one - so how is your assertion possibly true? What about all the so-called "Ghost Guns" that gang bangers are supposedly manufacturing in their homes? Is that because "otherwise lawful gun owners" own legal guns? You cannot even legally buy the serialized component of the firearm to manufacture into a complete firearm without doing so through an actual FFL (these are commonly called "80% kits" or sometimes are just the bare lower receiver of a AR-15 rifle - they are serialized and tracked by ATF and DOJ). > Not much but hunting rifles at home, locked up safely. You mean to say, not an AR-15 pattern rifle, or an AK-47 pattern rifle? What about a Mini-14 or Mini-30? You've probably never heard of them or seen one in person, and would probably be fine with them I would assume. They don't look like "military" rifles, right? Even though they fire the exact same cartridges as the two "scary military" rifles and can hold 5, 10, 20, 30+ rounds in their magazines too? In any event, it seems abundantly clear you do not have much experience with these firearms and their magazines - which makes your rejection of my original comment highly suspicious, and likely completely baseless.

tialaramex 6y ago
> It's gang shootings, and murders that dominate gun violence. Two things that will not stop if you magically removed all guns. Even though it's obviously nonsense, I have no doubt Alupis sincerely believes that if there aren't guns people will use guns anyway, somehow. Sure the facts might disagree but Alupis has no time for facts. Sure logic might disagree but Alupis has no time for logic. Alupis knows a truth and so nothing else matters, and this truth must be fiercely defended because, to their disappointment somehow facts and logic keep contradicting it. Stupid facts and logic, why aren't they subservient to Alupis' truth? Mostly I can't help you on gun control, people like Alupis aren't your main obstacle there although they don't help. But I do have a more general piece of advice. You shouldn't hire these people in any technical role that's going to involve debugging of any sort. Because they so easily believe in a truth which they have settled upon independent of the facts, they are useless in these roles and they don't know it. A defiant belief in truths that are belied by the facts might be an admirable trait in like, a preacher, or maybe marketing. But in debugging it's a massive impediment.
jariel 6y ago
A) Your comments about smaller mags are false; try and find some evidence to back your claims - there is none. Smaller mags are not 'unsafe'. B) You're missing the point about 'availability of weapons'. We don't need to speculate as to 'what might be' - we know exactly what 'would be' because here are dozens of other civilised countries as a basis of comparison. There is a perfect correlation between 'less guns widely available' and 'less gun crime'. It's blatantly obvious to anyone who's been outside the US for more than a few months. (And FYI - guns are not widely available in Switzerland as they are in the US). USA - tons of guns, tons of gun crime. Canada - less guns, less gun crime. Most of Europe (including CH) - very few guns, very little gun crime. Japan - almost zero guns, almost zero gun crime. If it's difficult to grasp the obvious, consider 'market forces' and 'supply and demand': when guns are 'banned' and they exist nowhere legally in a nation, they are actually quite hard to get hands on. A 'thug' in the US can easily get his hands on a weapon. In Canada, it's that much harder. In Europe, it's a huge pain. In Japan, it's almost impossible. And guess what? Why would they need them? As there are fewer guns, and the punishment for having them goes way up, the level of violence is de-escelated. In the UK they have a 'knife problem' - which is bad - but it's much better than having a 'gun problem'. Have you ever been to the UK? Most cops don't carry guns. How is this possible? Come on now - add up the points ... It's possible because there are almost no guns in the country, and the level of violence is low enough that they don't need to carry for the most part. Once again: the ignorance of 'gun lovers' who literally can't see the data in front of them, or who are completely incapable of grasping a situation that is 'beyond their borders'. It's a uniquely American thing, and it's really odd. ---> When there are considerably fewer guns in a civilised society, there is considerably less gun violence. Full Stop. C) As for my 'experience' with weapons - 4 years, Army. Yes, I've played with some nice toys, in the field, where they belong. But that's completely irrelevant.

by Alupis 6y ago

tialaramex 6y ago

> It's gang shootings, and murders that dominate gun violence. Two things that will not stop if you magically removed all guns. Even though it's obviously nonsense, I have no doubt Alupis sincerely believes that if there aren't guns people will use guns anyway, somehow. Sure the facts might disagree but Alupis has no time for facts. Sure logic might disagree but Alupis has no time for logic. Alupis knows a truth and so nothing else matters, and this truth must be fiercely defended because, to their disappointment somehow facts and logic keep contradicting it. Stupid facts and logic, why aren't they subservient to Alupis' truth? Mostly I can't help you on gun control, people like Alupis aren't your main obstacle there although they don't help. But I do have a more general piece of advice. You shouldn't hire these people in any technical role that's going to involve debugging of any sort. Because they so easily believe in a truth which they have settled upon independent of the facts, they are useless in these roles and they don't know it. A defiant belief in truths that are belied by the facts might be an admirable trait in like, a preacher, or maybe marketing. But in debugging it's a massive impediment.

jariel 6y ago

A) Your comments about smaller mags are false; try and find some evidence to back your claims - there is none. Smaller mags are not 'unsafe'. B) You're missing the point about 'availability of weapons'. We don't need to speculate as to 'what might be' - we know exactly what 'would be' because here are dozens of other civilised countries as a basis of comparison. There is a perfect correlation between 'less guns widely available' and 'less gun crime'. It's blatantly obvious to anyone who's been outside the US for more than a few months. (And FYI - guns are not widely available in Switzerland as they are in the US). USA - tons of guns, tons of gun crime. Canada - less guns, less gun crime. Most of Europe (including CH) - very few guns, very little gun crime. Japan - almost zero guns, almost zero gun crime. If it's difficult to grasp the obvious, consider 'market forces' and 'supply and demand': when guns are 'banned' and they exist nowhere legally in a nation, they are actually quite hard to get hands on. A 'thug' in the US can easily get his hands on a weapon. In Canada, it's that much harder. In Europe, it's a huge pain. In Japan, it's almost impossible. And guess what? Why would they need them? As there are fewer guns, and the punishment for having them goes way up, the level of violence is de-escelated. In the UK they have a 'knife problem' - which is bad - but it's much better than having a 'gun problem'. Have you ever been to the UK? Most cops don't carry guns. How is this possible? Come on now - add up the points ... It's possible because there are almost no guns in the country, and the level of violence is low enough that they don't need to carry for the most part. Once again: the ignorance of 'gun lovers' who literally can't see the data in front of them, or who are completely incapable of grasping a situation that is 'beyond their borders'. It's a uniquely American thing, and it's really odd. ---> When there are considerably fewer guns in a civilised society, there is considerably less gun violence. Full Stop. C) As for my 'experience' with weapons - 4 years, Army. Yes, I've played with some nice toys, in the field, where they belong. But that's completely irrelevant.