I can agree with the clinically ill, but when you consider the disproportionately high conviction rate of people of color, then the felony restriction becomes a racist stance.
You didnt mention this, but I am also against restricting service members with a dishonorable discharge. For many people, gun ownership is a large part of thier community and thier lives. These folks would have to choose between following every order (legal or not), or going home and being left out of their community and culture for the rest of thier lives. It's a huge amount of leverage to make soldiers shut up and comply.
I hard disagree on the tightly regulated stance. We are in the middle of a facist coup and you want to disarm every one? I have to question your motives, and I wonder if you have ever read a history book.
I think Roosevelt had it right when he said talk soflty and carry a big stick.
There's a huge spectrum between "nobody should ever own any gun" and "your local corner store should have an 'assault rifle and two sixpacks of beer' combo special".
I completely your point, but unless you're willing to actually start a civil war they aren't going to be very helpful. They are, at best, a mild deterrent against indiscriminate use of lethal force.
At the same time the US is still the only country in the world which regularly sees school shootings. This was the case before Trump, and I see no reason to believe it'll be any different after Trump.
I agree that the timing probably isn't the best right now, but after fixing the completely broken democratic system gun control should probably be placed somewhere near the top of the agenda.
It seems pretty clear that the populace is not going to use guns to oppose the fascists. Since that was a major (if not the most important) reason for the second amendment, it appears vestigial.
Also, as others rightly pointed out "much more tightly regulated" ≠ "banned entirely".
None of the points or sentiment I have raised here are new in anyway. There are many millions of people who feel the same as I do.
Why does wanting to own a tool for self defense make "us people" the reason for this mess?
I'm pretty certain this mess is due to the on going class war and our racist president that suffers from early onset dementia. Rome is on fire, but i had nothing to do with it.
So does the one it's in reply to. But you skipped that one to complain about this one.
It's absurd that anyone could pretend to believe that more people having guns is a "deterrent" mild or otherwise to lethal use of force? In every interview about why american cops shoot and kill orders of magnitude more people than most civilized countries, americans always argue it's because their citizenry is armed so the police need to be prepared to make life or death decisions in a split second at every moment on the job.
Nobody suggested that more guns were a solution to anything.
Guns have been more accessible and readily available for the entire history of the United States. School shootings are a relatively new development.
Access to and availability of guns has been more greatly restricted over that time. With virtually no impact.
Perhaps the desperation and miserable mental health of our population are bigger factors?
Every country you would point to likely has better access to healthcare, education, and much better social safety net than the US. As well as law enforcement and prison systems less focused on restitution/justice and more focused on education and rehabilitation. Other countries also see less recidivism and lower violent crime rates in general.
All available evidence indicates we should be spending much less time and energy focusing on guns and far more focusing on the failures and motivations of our government.
> They are, at best, a mild deterrent against indiscriminate use of lethal force.
Is a quote from a sibiling comment to the one I replied to.
It seems that at the very least an extraordinarily loud minority of americans believe that arming the general population should somehow result in fewer gun deaths. On the big social media platforms, the larger news networks, and right here on HN, I am always surprised that such an obviously incorrect idea can be so pervasive.
> All available evidence indicates we should be spending much less time and energy focusing on guns and far more focusing on the failures and motivations of our government.
No, it doesn't. You can't just assert that because it's what you think. Societal issues do play a part, but just as you need oxygen and fuel for a fire, removing either one stops the flames. So if changing the individual minds and morals of seemingly half your country seems easier than enacting legislation restricting access to guns... well I don't think you should hold your breath.
You're misquoting me. That was in the context of a hostile government, not guns in general for civilian-against-civilian "self-defense".
Also, the "at best" and mild" are quite important there. I believe that armed civilians might prevent someone like the National Guard from firing on groups of protestors when it gets hairy, out of fear of being shot in response. They aren't suicidal: you don't escalate when you are in a disadvantaged position!
The ATF can barely even define what a gun is. Todays platforms are modular so essentially they choose the largest, non-ware part and put the serial number there. That one part then becomes the "gun". In some cases that part doest even resemble a gun at all.
Will the restriction apply to addative manufacturing as well? will they also limit subtractive manufacturing like CNC? CNC is older, and capable of producing actual high quality firearms. Why not start there?
Are they going to limit highend commercial 3d printers? There exist farms of very high end printers that create parts on demand out of plastic and metal. whats going to happen to their business if parts get randomly flagged as a "gun" because some AI halucinates?
Are they going to ban producing toy guns and props?
Ill stop now, i feel like ive already put more thought into this than the legislators have.
To actually implement firearm detection your 3d printer would need to have the ability to reverse engineer the 3d solid model from g-code, then compare that solid model to a list of banned objects.
I agree. The domains are just too large for anyone to be an expert in everything. Platform engineers are expected to know 3 clouds, k8s, cloudflare, security, SRE, python, javascript, CI/CD and about 20 other things. Its just not possible to be great at all the things at the same time.
Employers would rather pay one salary than 2. They are not punished for demanding more frim their employees.
We really ought to form some kind of union that operates across companies. We must demand better working conditions.
Im having alot of fun with my new RTL-SDR dongle and Baofeng radio. I pretty quickly found SDR++ which really deepend the rabbit hole and generated about 1000 new questions.
A few weeks ago I knew nothing about radio or ham, but im learning alot and having fun. Its been a good distraction from "stuff".
Ham radio is a huge rabbit hole. It's a hobby full of other hobbies within. One of the most fun parts for me is Summits on the Air (SOTA).
You take a small portable HF transceiver up a mountain summit and attempt to make at least 4 contacts. You get points for "activating" the summit and folks at home get points for "hunting" you. You can also spot yourself online and sometimes you'll have a bunch of people from around the world trying to make contact with you.
The main thing holding EV back is the oil industry, not the tech. The US is the only country lagging on EV and its all because the industry puts so much effort in to squashing all progress.
EVs are simpler and cheaper. Look at how fast adoption is growing outside the US. If US citizens could buy a BYD for the same price as in China, the the US auto makers and oil companies would be in trouble.
US was also the one that started the solar panel industry during the cold war. After the cold war the politicians saw no value in it and a lot of the IP was sold to China. China is now out pacing the technology in solar. [0]
It is not about being first it is about continual investment to do it better. China are also the ones that have the most electric infrastructure to greatly reduce their reliance on foreign countries because of that momentum they kept up.
I drive quite a lot throught southern Europe with my EV, and it's super frustrating that gas stations have the infrastructure on the highway while for my EV I have to go just outside the highway to a fast charger (wasting time), then I need to pay again (and waste a lot of time to go through the gate) to get back on the highway for example in Italy.
I really wish it wish it was possible to trigger a re-call vote for congress, the senate, potus, and the supreme court.
reply