3 ms·
Ok. What's your stance on gun ownership then? And by gun, I mean naval guns.
by credit_guy 2mo ago
Ok. What's your stance on gun ownership then? And by gun, I mean naval guns.
- bigyabai 2mo agoMy position is that anyone can own a cannon and shells, but you only get to fire it once before the feds step in. Giving a naval cannon to the average person does not threaten humanity any more than giving them a gun or an LLM does. None of them are a panacea for anything.
- 0xDEAFBEAD 2mo agoA mass shooter wakes up in the morning and thinks: "I'll fire my naval gun once, then politely hand it to the feds..."
- bigyabai 2mo agoI imagine that he'd be pulled over by the cops towing his artillery into battle, first.
- 0xDEAFBEAD 2mo agoOn what grounds? You just said everyone should be allowed to own artillery.
- bigyabai 2mo agoSure, on the same grounds that you can own any gun. When you lug it into public and threaten ordinary people, you're liable to be followed, questioned or arrested.
- ianm218 2mo agoIt seems completely unhinged for civilians to have naval guns. You could level an entire neighborhood with one of those.
- bigyabai 2mo agoIt's also completely unhinged to own a Shahed 136 or a ballistic missile, but both are fairly attainable and even legal within certain usages.
- ianm218 2mo agoI don’t know what you mean man people obviously don’t own personal tomahawk missiles and that sort of thing. If you have a Shahed loaded with explosives on your property you will probably have to deal with LE
- bigyabai 2mo agoI mean, you don't put the explosives in until the end. Until then it's an "ironic hobbyist UAV" or whatever you want to call it.