4 ms·

> very real risk of instigating civil war. Doubtful. Especially considering the American Civil war was started by wealthy land owners, but fought by the poores

> very real risk of instigating civil war. Doubtful. Especially considering the American Civil war was started by wealthy land owners, but fought by the poorest conscripted Southerners. I don't really think Americans are willing to give up their extremely consumerist lives to fight and potentially die over what is essentially a hobby to most. Of course it's a convenient narrative: that Americans would take up arms in a glorious battle to defend the Second Amendment. But, ultimately it's a marketing tactic pushed by gun manufacturers, a scare tactic to get people to buy up excess inventory before the next capital 'D' Democrat takes office.

giantg2 3y ago
What these people are missing is that it's not just consumers that would be involved. We can already see how law enforcement is split on the issue when you look at how many rural sheriffs are refusing to enforce new gun laws as they are enacted in various states. This is an issue that has a strong urban/rural divide, which means there are people in all manner of roles that could be on either side. And yes, some companies or people take advantage of that, just as other do from reporting on mass shootings while largely ignoring the everyday shootings that pose a bigger threat.
Ancapistani 3y ago
> I don't really think Americans are willing to give up their extremely consumerist lives to fight and potentially die over what is essentially a hobby to most. I strongly disagree with the characterization that firearms are a "hobby to most". That might have been the case as recently as the 1980s, but the push for gun control in the 1990s, culminating in the "Assault Weapons Ban" of 1994, galvanized gun owners. I believe that a comfortable majority of gun owners today see through a political lens, not as a hobby. There's a reason the AR-15 became so prominent so quickly: they were (ineffectively) banned in 1994. When the Assault Weapons Ban expired in 2004, they flew off the shelves. They became symbols of the resistance to gun control, to the point that they acquired the nickname "America's Rifle". Now consider that in 1994, there were far, far fewer ARs in citizens' hands and a gun culture that was largely oriented around hunting. In 2023, American gun culture is firmly rooted in political activism.

giantg2 3y ago

What these people are missing is that it's not just consumers that would be involved. We can already see how law enforcement is split on the issue when you look at how many rural sheriffs are refusing to enforce new gun laws as they are enacted in various states. This is an issue that has a strong urban/rural divide, which means there are people in all manner of roles that could be on either side. And yes, some companies or people take advantage of that, just as other do from reporting on mass shootings while largely ignoring the everyday shootings that pose a bigger threat.

Ancapistani 3y ago

> I don't really think Americans are willing to give up their extremely consumerist lives to fight and potentially die over what is essentially a hobby to most. I strongly disagree with the characterization that firearms are a "hobby to most". That might have been the case as recently as the 1980s, but the push for gun control in the 1990s, culminating in the "Assault Weapons Ban" of 1994, galvanized gun owners. I believe that a comfortable majority of gun owners today see through a political lens, not as a hobby. There's a reason the AR-15 became so prominent so quickly: they were (ineffectively) banned in 1994. When the Assault Weapons Ban expired in 2004, they flew off the shelves. They became symbols of the resistance to gun control, to the point that they acquired the nickname "America's Rifle". Now consider that in 1994, there were far, far fewer ARs in citizens' hands and a gun culture that was largely oriented around hunting. In 2023, American gun culture is firmly rooted in political activism.