• OpenPassageways
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    Of course I’m aware of the calls for banning assault weapons and that we had an assault weapon ban for many years. Certainly a reasonable discussion should be had about where the line is. I’m not sure whether I agree with the assault weapon bans or whether they have a good classification, but either way they aren’t calling for banning ALL guns, they’re calling for banning certain types of guns.

    This just proves my point that the 2A crowd is shooting themselves in the foot by not being willing to discuss reasonable reforms.

    If you insist that the 2A allows you to have a gun that can shoot up a football stadium, then people are eventually just going to eliminate the 2A altogether, which would be harmful IMO.

    Instead we should acknowledge that there IS room for sensible reforms. For example, people should not be able to have nuclear missiles. Seems like common sense to me, maybe that’s a good place to start? Maybe there we can work our way down through artillery and figure out where the line is on guns that can shoot up massive crowds of people.

    Instead of insisting that a sentence written hundreds of years ago means you can do whatever you want with no restrictions, maybe come up with a reasonable argument as to why it is important for our democracy for you to bear those particular arms.

    Also, if you’re going to take on the tyrannical government, you’d probably need those nuclear missiles.

    • Jordan Lund@lemmy.one
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      they aren’t calling for banning ALL guns, they’re calling for banning certain types of guns.

      From a rights oriented perspective “that’s how it starts”. Especially for the folks online calling for an Australia style ban.

      people are eventually just going to eliminate the 2A altogether, which would be harmful IMO.

      That would require a new amendment and that’s just not possible given the current governmental dysfunction. You’d have to start by getting 290 votes in the House, the same folks who needed 15 tries to get the 218 votes needed to decide who their own leader would be. :(

      Instead of insisting that a sentence written hundreds of years ago means you can do whatever you want with no restrictions, maybe come up with a reasonable argument as to why it is important for our democracy for you to bear those particular arms.

      People confuse semi-automatic rifles for fully automatic rifles. I was uneducated myself, until I went out and bought an AR-15 myself and ran through a training class with it. I felt I needed that experience to speak intelligently about it.

      Like any other semi-automatic, it fires one time every time you pull the trigger. It’s not dramatically different from other kinds of rifles, other than it automatically ejects the shell and loads the next round instead of the shooter having to do it manually with a lever, pump or bolt.

      But man, have you SEEN some of those non semi-auto shooters?

      Pump:

      https://youtube.com/shorts/TUSjkwGopdw

      Bolt:

      https://youtube.com/shorts/I5P7qlix-hU

      Lever:
      https://youtube.com/shorts/CHJEwLtmLXw