5 ms·
OP, of this comment thread, was clearly trying to make the point that removing the element of skill significantly increases the possibility for menace: "The re
by rsync 14y ago
OP, of this comment thread, was clearly trying to make the point that removing the element of skill significantly increases the possibility for menace:
"The reason we do not get more sniper mass killings is that it takes a lot of skill to hit a target at a very long range with a sniper rifle ...
This rifle of course removes the skill element and allows for shooting at an extremely long range."
... in such a way as to suggest that the increased possibility for menace is so enhanced that it is irresponsible, nay, indefensible, for this to be available.
I was pointing out the fallacy of that line of reasoning. Skill requirements don't correlate with deadliness. I did not mention legality and neither did the OP, at least not in the way that other subcomments touched on.
edit: RE: The argument at hand is obviously whether a particular thing should be illegal because it is deadly.
No, that was not the argument at hand. The argument was whether high skill vs. low skill vectors of attack somehow change the ethical judgement involved in allowing something in the first place. I don't care that you hijacked the thread in this direction, but I do think it was a hijack.
- abraininavat 14y agoNo, that was not the argument at hand. The argument was whether high skill vs. low skill vectors of attack somehow change the ethical judgement involved in allowing something in the first place. I don't care that you hijacked the thread in this direction, but I do think it was a hijack. How does bringing up Sarin gas help your argument here? Sarin gas = illegal, low "skill vector"[1] This firearm = legal, low "skill vector" Unless you don't consider consistency important, you seem to be arguing that either sarin gas should be made legal or this firearm should be made illegal. I think you failed at making the point you were trying to make. [1] I'm assuming here that sarin gas has a "low skill vector". That's obviously not true.
- bmelton 14y agoRegarding [1] - while you are 100% correct concerning the manufacture of sarin gas, you are almost certainly wrong in relation to the deployment and/or activation of sarin gas in a controlled space. "Throwing a grenade" is generally considered 'low skill'. In the case of the Tokyo sarin gas incident, the gas was deployed in a plastic bag (I'm thinking zip loc) and was stabbed with a sharpened umbrella to deploy.
- deleted 14y ago[deleted]