Red Mosquito

warehouse wrote:

macphisto wrote:

warehouse wrote:wouldn't a hunting rifle or hand gun be just as, if not more effective, for self defense?

Hunting rifle, assuming you're thinking bolt-action rifle, not as maneuverable and slower. Handgun not as powerful.

warehouse wrote:why on earth would anyone consider recreational shooting more important than the protection of humans? this isn't even part of the bullshit, outdated constitutional argument. its just weirdos playing with guns.

False dichotomy.

a friend of mine actually suggested using a hunting rifle for protection in his house b/c you don't have to be super accurate. it makes sense that it's not as light and easy to use, but it can still be effective. i'm not sure why power comes into this. does a more powerful gun protect you more? or are you talking shooting through walls?

what someone does as a hobby does not trump the safety of the public. i just can't wrap my head around that argument.

BurtReynolds wrote:All I'm saying is that violent overthrow of the US government is still very possible. You just have to believe.

Birds in Hell wrote:That perverse logic that says unless a measure is 100% effective in all possible scenarios then it’s pointless is so disingenuous. How can anyone say that kind of garbage and maintain any self-respect?

verb_to_trust wrote:Gun control is definitely a more practical idea than covid control

Birds in Hell wrote:

Birds in Hell wrote:That perverse logic that says unless a measure is 100% effective in all possible scenarios then it’s pointless is so disingenuous. How can anyone say that kind of garbage and maintain any self-respect?

verb_to_trust wrote:Gun control is definitely a more practical idea than covid control

Same logic regularly used (as again here) with respect to COVID, but the sensible and relatively modest restrictions imposed by Australian governments inarguably saved many thousands of lives that would otherwise have been lost.

verb_to_trust wrote:

Birds in Hell wrote:

Birds in Hell wrote:That perverse logic that says unless a measure is 100% effective in all possible scenarios then it’s pointless is so disingenuous. How can anyone say that kind of garbage and maintain any self-respect?

verb_to_trust wrote:Gun control is definitely a more practical idea than covid control

Same logic regularly used (as again here) with respect to COVID, but the sensible and relatively modest restrictions imposed by Australian governments inarguably saved many thousands of lives that would otherwise have been lost.

Doubt

Birds in Hell wrote:

verb_to_trust wrote:

Birds in Hell wrote:

Birds in Hell wrote:That perverse logic that says unless a measure is 100% effective in all possible scenarios then it’s pointless is so disingenuous. How can anyone say that kind of garbage and maintain any self-respect?

verb_to_trust wrote:Gun control is definitely a more practical idea than covid control

Same logic regularly used (as again here) with respect to COVID, but the sensible and relatively modest restrictions imposed by Australian governments inarguably saved many thousands of lives that would otherwise have been lost.

Doubt

I guess it’s just random dumb luck that Australia’s total death count since the beginning of the pandemic (8335) is significantly less than that of many states in the USA.

Just one of those weird, unexplainable things.

elliseamos wrote: Fewer guns. Not none, Mac.
Harder to get guns, but not never, ever can haz.
Reasonable steps to track down the origin of a gun that still will end up being used for horrible purposes.
Hobby people can print away, but will have increased liability if something they make gets used in a bad way.

Birds in Hell wrote:That perverse logic that says unless a measure is 100% effective in all possible scenarios then it’s pointless is so disingenuous. How can anyone say that kind of garbage and maintain any self-respect?

Bi_3 wrote:

Birds in Hell wrote:That perverse logic that says unless a measure is 100% effective in all possible scenarios then it’s pointless is so disingenuous. How can anyone say that kind of garbage and maintain any self-respect?

BurtReynolds wrote:Me hearing doofuses saying you can't fight the US government with assault rifles.

verb_to_trust wrote:If our government wants to wage war on us they have already shown how they will do it during the last two years. Guns don't factor.

elliseamos wrote:I'm pretty both things can be true.

Rocks at a knife fight or knives at a gun fight or something...

macphisto wrote:

verb_to_trust wrote:If our government wants to wage war on us they have already shown how they will do it during the last two years. Guns don't factor.

Yet things didn't get nearly as draconian here as they did in Australia, and China still. Could an armed populace be the difference?