3 ms·
the NRA is also in part defined by its members. These members are, for the most part, highly conservative and see technology like that as making guns worse. The
by TheDong 12y ago
the NRA is also in part defined by its members. These members are, for the most part, highly conservative and see technology like that as making guns worse. They don't worry about safety; after-all, the point of the gun is power and something that is dangerous feels more powerful.
The other reason people oppose them is because it would reduce the gun-owner's ability to re-sell the gun to criminals with no difficulty or government intervention. It would remove some control from the gun owners.
One man's safety feature is another man's oppressive inconvenience.
- symfoniq 12y agoMost gun owners I know are like Unix programmers, in that they favor the simplest solution that could possibly work. A safety feature that makes a gun significantly more complicated—and therefore possibly less likely to work when needed—is a non-starter for most gun owners. Furthermore, most gun owners have firearms at least in part because of the criminal element. I find the argument that a significant number of gun owners want to be able to resell their firearms to criminals to be patently absurd.
- TheDong 12y agoThe criminal bit was tongue in cheek. The "government control" bit right afterwards was the real point. I disagree with your comparison. If a gun owner wanted the simplest thing that would work, then their guns would not be so fancy / complicated. There would not be a market for non-restrictive but non-essential gun enhancements. Sorry my joke wasn't clear to you and that you missed the point that it's conservatives that fear government control over ownership/reselling who have issue here.