this post was submitted on 30 Aug 2023
50 points (100.0% liked)

Politics

10177 readers
13 users here now

In-depth political discussion from around the world; if it's a political happening, you can post it here.


Guidelines for submissions:

These guidelines will be enforced on a know-it-when-I-see-it basis.


Subcommunities on Beehaw:


This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] dudinax@programming.dev 7 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Banning guns with a high sustained rate of fire is not stupid. It's just politically convenient that some of them look scary.

Many, but not most, Americans need guns. Almost none need guns that can accurately shoot dozens of rounds in a short span.

[–] pbjamm 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The number of Americans that NEED guns is a vanishingly small percentage. Such a need should be easy to prove and easy to regulate.

[–] dudinax@programming.dev 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I agree that it's easy to prove but America has a huge rural population and if you live in the country it's a good idea to own a gun.

[–] pbjamm 1 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Why?

For the first 13 years of my life I lived on a rural dirt road surrounded by hundreds of acres of forest. I can think of exactly zero times in those years where we needed a gun.

[–] Recant 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

Well that is just one individual out of millions. Just because you don't see a need doesn't mean others don't. Plus us as individuals can't determine what other large groups can and cannot have. We don't have the same life experiences.

Someone may be the victim of a sexual assault and when living in a rural area having something to defend themselves gives them some peace of mind.

Imagine living in a small neighborhood where everyone knows everyone and you don't get along with a corrupt police force. When you are in danger from someone during a home invasion or if you are hiking in the wilderness, you may not trust the cops to act in your best interest

[–] pbjamm 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Plus us as individuals can’t determine what other large groups can and cannot have. We don’t have the same life experiences.

Us as a collective do so all the time. It is a totally normal activity in a society. Nations other than the USA have successfully done this with guns. There is no reason the USA could not do the same except will power.

The rest of your paranoid what-if scenarios are not a valid reason for everyone to have access to unlimited firepower.

[–] Recant 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

Well we are also not other countries. We have different culture, socio economic makeup, different population distribution, and different history. Something that works in another country isn't guaranteed to work here.

I think a key reason why nothing will ever change is because moderates offer "hey we can do mental health checks, bans on ownership for people convicted of violent crimes, and mandatory wait times" to meet in the middle and compromise but both sides don't want to do that.

Just a symptom of how polarized the nation is. Until we fix that, nothing will ever change.

[–] bermuda 1 points 1 year ago

But what about 30 to 50 feral hogs

/s