|
I'd like to discuss the duality of the "firearms like the AR-15 are needed to resist government tyranny" and also "the right to possess handguns shouldn't be restricted" because it seems relevant. If the goal is to provide the population a means to mount a defense against a tyrannical government, arguably the AR-15 and guns which are a more effective weapon of war, should be allowed. The population, to resist tyranny, must be armed in relatively equal measure to the government itself. Handguns are irrelevant at that point, you may restrict them arbitrarily because they will not aid in the defense against tyranny, and even automatic weapons or grenade launchers could not reasonably be restricted. Even, arguably, the possession of nuclear weapons by a civilian could be justified as proportionate to the theoretical opposing force. Quite on the other hand, if you're going to say "weapons of war aren't needed, the AR-15 is too much, the point of the second amendment is to provide each and every citizen the ability to defend themselves with deadly force if needed" then, yes, the private possession of handguns is allowable, but the possession of semi-automatic rifles is not.
|
#
¿
Jun 5, 2022 22:38
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 14, 2024 14:06 |
|
|
Harold Fjord posted:You have to address the fear if you want results. And, the perfect example of this is the solid gold Yankee lunatic that has gone down in local lore as "the Nose Hill Gentleman." TL;DR: A cop from Michigan was visiting Calgary during the Stampede, basically a giant city-wide festival including pretty much everything from concerts to rodeos to charitable events and everything else. He was walking in a local park with his wife, and some folks from a local radio station approached him and tried to offer him free concert tickets or tickets to the Stampede because they were out giving poo poo away to people. He apparently felt this "confrontation" was a horrible threat and bemoaned that he could not carry a gun to "defend himself" from, I suppose, the threat of... people giving him free things? https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/nose-hill-gentlemen-pro-gun-letter-sparks-twitter-frenzy-1.1172624 It's easy to laugh at him (and I do, every time I think about it), but the truth is that if you want to fix the roots of America's rather insane gun culture, you have to address the cultural factors that make a guy like this think some people talking to him in a park could be a threat. That's a perfectly insane thing to think, and that kind of paranoia is driving the desire to have firearms for personal defense. That being said, I absolutely think he believes every word of what he said, and that he thinks there was actually a possible threat there. That's what we need to address. I've been in some... rougher areas of the world in my life, I've seen people get shot, and on no occasion did it begin with a friendly conversation or the attempt to offer free things.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 22, 2022 20:56
|
|
|
I think, as well, some people don't live an interesting enough life, for lack of a better term. I got quasi-mugged for $50 once. gently caress it, it's $50. It upset me, but in the end would a gun have helped? I doubt it. So I'm down $50, and life goes on, the security guard at my hotel that night gave me a pack of smokes for my trouble and offered to call a hooker (I declined). Now, throw some guns into the mix? Well, someone could be dead. Maybe me, maybe the mugger, maybe some random poor fucker. Doesn't matter. Guns wouldn't help.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 22, 2022 21:52
|
|