2 ms·

If you're aiming for perfection, sure. Two stroke engine parts don't have a massive legally protected cult following like guns, nor are they high-cost many-tim

by Groxx 3y ago

If you're aiming for perfection, sure. Two stroke engine parts don't have a massive legally protected cult following like guns, nor are they high-cost many-times-repeated consumables like drugs. They're closer to antiques - some will collect them, most won't bother if they're not available. Ban it and you'll stop major places from selling it, and minor places from widely advertising they have it. You won't stop anyone dead-set on continuing to do so, but you will stop most people because the cost will be higher and it'll be much harder to find.

mcpackieh 3y ago
If you're not shooting for perfectionism and won't bother to enforce a spar parts ban, then why propose a spare parts ban in the first place? Just ban the production/sale of new two-stroke machines, not the spare parts. As old machines wear the cost and effort of keeping them in service will eventually exceed the activation energy for buying a new machine. An unenforced ban of spare parts would accomplish nothing productive; it would waste your political capital and train a new group of people to have contemptuous disregard for laws. With respect to the antique analogy, you have it completely backwards. Antiques are things which have outlasted their practical usefulness but are kept around anyway because people have some nostalgic or aesthetic affinity for them. Machine guns fall into this category; they are essentially fetishes (in the traditional nonsexual sense of the word). Virtually nobody is earning their living with machine guns. Two stroke motors on the other hand are in active use by thousands if not millions of people to earn a living. If they were in fact antiques, then they wouldn't be a problem in the first place because antiques aren't put to use. If you banned new production of two-stroke machines, the ones that already exist would gradually become antiques despite the existence of legal spare parts, and eventually the only people keeping them in running order would be the antique geeks who own it because they like it, not because they earn a living with it. The people who are actively earning a living with two stroke motors today are the people you [should] have a gripe with, the lawn care guys who run two-stroke leaf blowers in your neighborhood aren't antique collectors doing it for fun, they're guys trying to feed their children.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
bbradley406 3y ago
>Two stroke engine parts don't have a massive legally protected cult following like guns Yes they do, they're called dirtbikes and a large part of America enjoys riding them. Other countries use them in the scooter form factor. Could some of the use cases be covered by alternatives like the electric Surron? Sure. Will you successfully pass a law against them in the next 30 years? Not a chance.
- Groxx 3y ago
  I think you're massively over-estimating how many dirt bikes there are in America, and/or massively underestimating how many gun owners there are. Gun ownership is near 50%. It's constitutionally protected. Dirt bikes are neither.

by Groxx 3y ago

mcpackieh 3y ago

If you're not shooting for perfectionism and won't bother to enforce a spar parts ban, then why propose a spare parts ban in the first place? Just ban the production/sale of new two-stroke machines, not the spare parts. As old machines wear the cost and effort of keeping them in service will eventually exceed the activation energy for buying a new machine. An unenforced ban of spare parts would accomplish nothing productive; it would waste your political capital and train a new group of people to have contemptuous disregard for laws. With respect to the antique analogy, you have it completely backwards. Antiques are things which have outlasted their practical usefulness but are kept around anyway because people have some nostalgic or aesthetic affinity for them. Machine guns fall into this category; they are essentially fetishes (in the traditional nonsexual sense of the word). Virtually nobody is earning their living with machine guns. Two stroke motors on the other hand are in active use by thousands if not millions of people to earn a living. If they were in fact antiques, then they wouldn't be a problem in the first place because antiques aren't put to use. If you banned new production of two-stroke machines, the ones that already exist would gradually become antiques despite the existence of legal spare parts, and eventually the only people keeping them in running order would be the antique geeks who own it because they like it, not because they earn a living with it. The people who are actively earning a living with two stroke motors today are the people you [should] have a gripe with, the lawn care guys who run two-stroke leaf blowers in your neighborhood aren't antique collectors doing it for fun, they're guys trying to feed their children.

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]

bbradley406 3y ago

>Two stroke engine parts don't have a massive legally protected cult following like guns Yes they do, they're called dirtbikes and a large part of America enjoys riding them. Other countries use them in the scooter form factor. Could some of the use cases be covered by alternatives like the electric Surron? Sure. Will you successfully pass a law against them in the next 30 years? Not a chance.

Groxx 3y ago
I think you're massively over-estimating how many dirt bikes there are in America, and/or massively underestimating how many gun owners there are. Gun ownership is near 50%. It's constitutionally protected. Dirt bikes are neither.