- Sep 28, 2008
- 42,161
- 250,202
- 4,281
- MBTI
- INFJ
- Enneagram
- 954 so/sx
Bump stocks for guns
- Thread starter just me
- Start date
To quote Jordan Peterson's feelings on a different topic:
"[Ready made ideological solutions don't work, the real world is too complicated]"
Which is not to say that there is nothing that can be done but rather that no solution applied will be completely clean and effective and without consequence. I think it is more useful to be pragmatic and not ideological on this issue.
The questions at the heart of this are
What do we want to change?
What are we willing to give up to get it?
The answer to the first is an end to these massacres or at least an extreme reduction in their frequency of occurrence, and so now the question becomes what we as a society are willing to sacrifice to create the desired outcome.
"[Ready made ideological solutions don't work, the real world is too complicated]"
Which is not to say that there is nothing that can be done but rather that no solution applied will be completely clean and effective and without consequence. I think it is more useful to be pragmatic and not ideological on this issue.
The questions at the heart of this are
What do we want to change?
What are we willing to give up to get it?
The answer to the first is an end to these massacres or at least an extreme reduction in their frequency of occurrence, and so now the question becomes what we as a society are willing to sacrifice to create the desired outcome.
- Sep 28, 2008
- 42,161
- 250,202
- 4,281
- MBTI
- INFJ
- Enneagram
- 954 so/sx
Right: These things aren't common and there are greater threats at hand. The real worry is the deterioration of our rights and our ability to protect ourselves!
Left: We must do whatever it takes to stop these horrible atrocities! No loss of life is acceptable. We need to prevent these things at whatever the cost!
Everyone actually: I don't want people to die but it happens and I don't know how to stop it and it makes me sad and confused
The reality is whatever he does won't fix the problem. He had to do something and the best strategy is to ban bump stocks. Nothing we do now will change it. I think the answer is smart guns.
- Sep 28, 2008
- 42,161
- 250,202
- 4,281
- MBTI
- INFJ
- Enneagram
- 954 so/sx
A smart gun is a gun that doesn't kill anybody. We need weapons of mass incapacitation.
Interesting. Sounds like it will be a while though but that’s no reason not to explore it. It seems that they are mostly able to recognize authorized users, but I don’t see much about recognizing unauthorized targets.
Edit: It would probably still be a very tough sell to gun enthusiasts though.
Last edited:
A quarter of Americans own guns. Half of them own one to two guns. About 14% own between 8 and 140 guns...This is half of all the guns in America. I’m going to guess there is a high correlation between those who stock-pile and those who own assault-type rifles, which make up about 1% of all guns.
So, it’s not that “America” has a gun problem. It’s that a small group of people who can’t control their gun habit are fighting tooth and nail to keep the market open to assault-type rifles, thereby enabling those who fancy a mass shooting spree to go and buy one themselves.
No wonder the NRA keeps roping the rest of the gun owners in, using the slippery-slope argument. Without their support, owners of assault-type rifles don’t stand a chance, and the gun makers would lose that line of business.
So, it’s not that “America” has a gun problem. It’s that a small group of people who can’t control their gun habit are fighting tooth and nail to keep the market open to assault-type rifles, thereby enabling those who fancy a mass shooting spree to go and buy one themselves.
No wonder the NRA keeps roping the rest of the gun owners in, using the slippery-slope argument. Without their support, owners of assault-type rifles don’t stand a chance, and the gun makers would lose that line of business.
If you make an attachment that you add to every gun being sold which makes the gun better then every normal weapon then older weapons will be obsolete after a while.
Sure. First a 1/4 of the population = over 100 million. Second, where are you getting your numbers from?
Safer will not necessarily translate to better in everybody’s opinion. However there are caveats to this. Are you alluding to guns that decide who can use them, ones that decide who they can be used on, or both?
Hardliners will probably still say that they are the best judge of when/who they can shoot or not. Will the “brains” allow for mods and tinkering to fine tune performance within the law? What incentive will there be for someone who has and likes their guns to give them up or modify them in such a way? What will it cost and who will pay? Anyone who is fearful of the government would probably not want their arms potentially controllable in that manner.
These are questions that will require answers down the line because everybody will have to buy in for this kind of thing to work.
https://www.census.gov/popclock/world
So 1/4 of the pop. is roughly 81,820,386.
Doesn't matter much, just wanted to clear this up, but 1/4 of the population being what you claimed would imply that the total US population is over 400 million. Considering Canada's current population is around 36.8 million, your estimate was off by like two Canadas.
Yes, because you no longer listen you those who point out the inconsistencies in your logic and pseudo-reasaoning.
And you said to “fry em”, not me.
And yes, you are waiting for the end of days giddily.....I bet you danced around praising the Lord when Trump said he was moving the Embassy to Jerusalem.
One more step closer until your rapturing!!