5 ms·
> The sad part is that the U.S. has a huge population of people that still don’t think anyone else’s rights to the pursuit of happiness and peace take precedenc
by mgraybosch 2y ago
> The sad part is that the U.S. has a huge population of people that still don’t think anyone else’s rights to the pursuit of happiness and peace take precedence over their constitutional right to own guns, and if Sandy Hook didn’t move the needle then I don’t see what will.
Sandy Hook is just one reason why I don't own a AR-15 or other semiautomatic firearms. I'm of the opinion that no civilian (police included) needs a semiautomatic.
But I've got a .30 lever-action rifle. I usually only load it at the range. I usually only fire it at the range. I've never even aimed my weapon at another human being, despite occasionally being tempted.
I see no reason why I should allow my rights to be abridged because other people abuse theirs. The needs of the many might outweigh the needs of the few, but I do not accept that they can outweigh the rights of the individual.
- prophesi 2y agoI'd wonder if a reasonable compromise would be for licensed ranges to have guns that people can toy around with, and not civilians themselves. At the very least, a ban on semiautomatics and bump stocks sounds like it'd reach bipartisan appeal.
- techjamie 2y agoThis already happens, actually. At the range I go to, you can rent fully automatic weapons and they'll walk it out with you, and for a non-trivial cost of usually $1/round, you can spray the range down. You can also rent a number of more conventional weapons to try as well.
- mgraybosch 2y ago> At the very least, a ban on semiautomatics and bump stocks sounds like it'd reach bipartisan appeal. I think you're assuming that Republicans are still capable of bipartisan compromise. You'll have to pardon my cynicism given recent history.