Spring forward.
To delete this message, click the X at top right.

Gun Control

Post Reply
Dave from down under
Posts: 3908
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2021 4:50 pm
Location: Down here!

Re: Gun Control

#126

Post by Dave from down under »

fierceredpanda wrote: Thu Mar 25, 2021 5:10 pm
Dave from down under wrote: Thu Mar 25, 2021 5:04 pm Bryant
AR-15 with 30 round magazine mostly used
But also an AR-10.
Effectively the same gun in a different caliber (7.62 instead of 5.56).
Bryant (may his name be ever reviled) bought the AR-15 after the AR-10 and used it for most of his murders.
qbawl
Posts: 738
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 11:05 am

Re: Gun Control

#127

Post by qbawl »

Off Topic
I trained on M14s in '64. There are times when you need a high volume of fire of course but there are costs associated with operating in full auto mode literally you burned through a lot of 7.62 NATO rounds and accuracy takes a lot of discipline and training. The hot end rises the longer your burst and keeping it on target takes some skill. Also, too the M14 had a rep as being a bit temperamental The one I had in basic training had a tendency to put two shots on target and the third would go high. Turns out the rear sight was loose and two shots were enough to take it out of adjustment. No one seemed very interested in fixing it so I adjusted (Kentucky windage).
User avatar
neonzx
Posts: 6120
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 11:01 am
Location: FloriDUH Hell
Verified: 🤩✅✅✅✅✅🤩

Re: Gun Control

#128

Post by neonzx »

Mr brolin wrote: Thu Mar 25, 2021 8:44 am Cynical....maybe.....Realistic.....more than likely
Unlikely.

Mr brolin,

Let's talk about the 3 major school shootings in our generation. Columbine HS, Sandy Hook Elementary, and Stoneman Douglas HS.

We razed Columbine and Sandy Hook to the DIRT and rebuilt anew because of the 2nd amendment damage. Stoneman Douglas is still standing, but with major refurbishments because of 2nd amendment damage. (I don't even have to directly talk about the death of our children in what we had to do to recover)

You know where I'm going. The 2nd Amendment in modern times brings nothing but PAIN.
User avatar
John Thomas8
Posts: 5103
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 7:42 pm
Location: Central NC
Occupation: Tech Support

Re: Gun Control

#129

Post by John Thomas8 »

neonzx wrote: Thu Mar 25, 2021 5:45 pm
You know where I'm going. The 2nd Amendment in modern times brings nothing but PAIN.
I disagree. Millions of ARs owned by millions of owners have shot no one at all, and will never do so.
User avatar
fierceredpanda
Posts: 590
Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2021 12:11 pm
Location: BAR Headquarters - Turn left at the portrait of George III
Occupation: Criminal defense attorney. I am not your lawyer. My posts != legal advice.

Re: Gun Control

#130

Post by fierceredpanda »

John Thomas8 wrote: Thu Mar 25, 2021 7:46 pm
neonzx wrote: Thu Mar 25, 2021 5:45 pm
You know where I'm going. The 2nd Amendment in modern times brings nothing but PAIN.
I disagree. Millions of ARs owned by millions of owners have shot no one at all, and will never do so.
Are you serious? The "everybody's doing it" defense?

Millions of people drive their car without a seat belt and don't die in a crash.

Millions of people drive above a .08 and make it home safely.

Millions of people smoke marijuana without hurting anyone.

Dozens of people graze their cattle on federal land without paying the fees.

Try using these excuses with your friendly local law enforcement.
"There's no play here. There's no angle. There's no champagne room. I'm not a miracle worker, I'm a janitor. The math on this is simple. The smaller the mess, the easier it is for me to clean up." -Michael Clayton
User avatar
John Thomas8
Posts: 5103
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 7:42 pm
Location: Central NC
Occupation: Tech Support

Re: Gun Control

#131

Post by John Thomas8 »

No, I pointing out facts.

And yes, I can tell my local LEO I have a gun in the car and survive, because I'm not an idiot and guns aren't illegal while everything you listed is illegal.
Dave from down under
Posts: 3908
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2021 4:50 pm
Location: Down here!

Re: Gun Control

#132

Post by Dave from down under »

As mentioned above, the mass murderer Tarrant left Australia for NZ because he could get the weapons he wanted to use in NZ that he couldn't easily get them in Australia.

Here are the types of firearms he could have got in NSW

https://www.police.nsw.gov.au/__data/as ... _Sheet.pdf

To lawfully possess or use firearms in NSW a person must be authored to do so by a firearms licence or permit.
This FACT sheet provides information on the different categories of licence available and the types of firearms
which apply to each licence category.
What are the licence categories are available to licence holders in NSW?
Category A, B, C, D, H, Firearms Collector and Firearms Dealer.
What firearms are applicable to a Category A firearms licence?
* Air rifles.
* Rimfire rifles (other than self-loading).
* Shotguns (other than pump action, lever action or self-loading).
* Shotgun/rimfire combinations.
All prohibited firearms are excluded from this licence category. Prohibited firearms are listed in Schedule 1 of the
Firearms Act 1996.
What firearms are applicable to a Category B firearms licence?
* Muzzle-loading firearms (other than pistols).
* Centre-fire rifles (other than self-loading).
* Shotgun/centre-fire rifle combinations.
* Lever action shotguns with a magazine capacity of no more than 5 rounds.
All prohibited firearms are excluded from this licence category. Prohibited firearms are listed in Schedule 1 of the
Firearms Act 1996.
What firearms are applicable to a Category C firearms licence?
* Self-loading rimfire rifles with a magazine capacity of no more than 10 rounds.
* Self-loading shotguns with a magazine capacity of no more than 5 rounds.
* Pump action shotguns with a magazine capacity of no more than 5 rounds.
These firearms are prohibited except for limited purposes.
Some firearms, specifically those adapted for military purposes, are excluded under all circumstances from this
licence category.
What firearms are applicable to a Category D firearms licence?
* Self-loading centre-fire rifles.
* Self-loading rimfire rifles with a magazine capacity of more than 10 rounds.
* Self-loading shotguns with a magazine capacity of more than 5 rounds.
* Pump action shotguns with a magazine capacity of more than 5 rounds.
* Lever action shotguns with a magazine capacity of more than 5 rounds.
* Any firearms to which a Category C licence applies.
These firearms are prohibited except for official purposes.
Some firearms, specifically those adapted for military purposes, are excluded under all circumstances from this
licence category.
What firearms are applicable to a Category H firearms licence?
* Pistols (including blank fire pistols and air pistols).
Prohibited firearms are excluded from this licence category. Prohibited pistols are not authorised for Sport/Target
shooters.
Are there restrictions on the types of firearms allowed for each genuine reason?
Yes. There are restrictions on the category of licence, and therefore types of firearms, allowed for each genuine
reason. See each individual genuine reason FACT Sheet for restrictions on licence category and types of firearms
authorised for each genuine reason. Also, see the Genuine Reason Table available on the Licence and Genuine
Reason page on the website.
Are there restrictions on what the firearms can be used for?
Yes. Firearms may only be used in connection with the purpose established by
the person as being the genuine reason for possessing or using the firearm -
sections 7 and 7A of the Firearms Act 1996.
For example, if you have category A and B firearms for the sole genuine reason
of Sport / Target shooting, you cannot use those firearms for any other
purpose.
What about imitation firearms?
Imitation firearms are defined in section 4D of the Firearms Act 1996.
A person must obtain a firearms permit to possess or use imitation firearms.
For more information on imitation firearms, see the FACT Sheet 'Imitation
Firearms Permit' available on the Firearms Permit page on the Firearms
Registry Internet site.
Are there any restrictions on the number or type of firearms able to be
acquired?
Yes. There are restrictions on the acquisition of handguns for Probationary
Pistol Licence holders.
No Permits to Acquire a Handgun will be issued for the first six months of the
probationary pistol licence. Only two Permits to Acquire will be issued in the
second six months of the probationary pistol licence.
As a Probationary Pistol Licence holder you may have a combination of any
two handguns, with the exception that you must not possess a centrefire and a
rimfire pistol at the same time, within the second six months.
Are there restrictions on a category C licence?
Yes. The number of firearms authorised under a Category C licence issued to a
primary producer are limited to:
* No more than one registered self-loading rimfire rifle with a magazine
capacity of no more than 10 rounds, and
* No more than one registered shotgun.
Consideration may be given to increasing the number of firearms authorised
under this licence, if a special need exists, and has been established to the
satisfaction of the Commissioner.
The special need could be the size of the rural property or because your
activities involve more than one rural property.
Are there restrictions on a category D licence?
Yes. The number of firearms authorised under a Category D licence issued to a
primary producer, (or a person who is the owner, lessee or manager of land
used for primary production) and who is participating in an authorised
campaign under the VPAC genuine reason, is restricted to three (3) registered
firearms.
Related Information
See FACT Sheets for each genuine reason, and FACT Sheet 'Imitation Firearms
Permit'.
https://www.police.nsw.gov.au/__data/as ... rearms.pdf
Dave from down under
Posts: 3908
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2021 4:50 pm
Location: Down here!

Re: Gun Control

#133

Post by Dave from down under »

NSW
https://www.legislation.nsw.gov.au/view ... -046#sch.1
Firearms Act 1996 No 46

for those interested
Dave from down under
Posts: 3908
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2021 4:50 pm
Location: Down here!

Re: Gun Control

#134

Post by Dave from down under »

So we have clear unequivocal proof of gun control stopping a mass shooting (at Lakemba mosque in NSW) and lack of gun control allowing a mass shooting (51 dead) in Christchurch.
(Unfortunately)

Feel free to use this example with anyone who says it makes no difference and that criminals and the insane will always find a way around the restrictions.
User avatar
neonzx
Posts: 6120
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 11:01 am
Location: FloriDUH Hell
Verified: 🤩✅✅✅✅✅🤩

Re: Gun Control

#135

Post by neonzx »

Dave from down under wrote: Thu Mar 25, 2021 10:25 pm So we have clear unequivocal proof of gun control stopping a mass shooting (at Lakemba mosque in NSW) and lack of gun control allowing a mass shooting (51 dead) in Christchurch.
(Unfortunately)

Feel free to use this example with anyone who says it makes no difference and that criminals and the insane will always find a way around the restrictions.
New Zealand locked their actions down fast. The USA does zero action on same..

Because we are "exceptional" -- we are so special -- that's why the world admires us -- or not so much anymore.
Dave from down under
Posts: 3908
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2021 4:50 pm
Location: Down here!

Re: Gun Control

#136

Post by Dave from down under »

28 days for NZ, only 1 politician (a libertarian) who opposed the legislation.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_law_in_New_Zealand
Categories of firearms after 2019 changes
Pistols Were not specifically targeted by changes to legislation and this category remains largely the same.[29]
Restricted weapons include machine guns, selective-fire assault rifles, grenades and rocket launchers. This category also includes some non-firearm weapons such as pepper spray. As of late 2019 all semi auto center-fire rifles and any rifle or rifle magazine capable of holding more than 10 rounds now fall into the restricted category, as do box magazine fed shotguns and shotguns with a magazine capacity of over 5 cartridges (both pump-action and semi-auto) . Semi-auto tubular magazine shotguns not holding more than 5 rounds and semi-auto rim-fire rifles not holding more than 10 rounds in a magazine are exempt.[30] Cabinet can declare things to be restricted weapons by regulation.
Military-style semi-automatics As of late 2019 the MSSA category no longer exists with all center-fire semi-auto rifles now in the restricted category. Rim-fire rifles holding more than 10 cartridges also now fall into the restricted class. Shotguns with a capacity of over 5 shells or fed by a box magazine are also restricted. All magazines holding more than 10 rounds are also restricted. Exempted semi-auto long arms include: rim fire rifles holding 10 rounds or less, and shotguns only with tubular magazines and a capacity of five rounds or less.[31]
A Category firearms are those that do not fall into any other category, and are the vast majority of legally-owned firearms in New Zealand. As of late 2020 the A category no longer includes center-fire semi-autos (except shotguns with a tubular magazine of 5 rounds or less). Rim-fire semi-autos with a magazine capacity of 10 or less are A category, as are all manual action rifles with a capacity of 10 rounds or less.[32]
Registration is not required under the law but the police carry out a regime similar to registration for all but "A Category" firearms. Firearms in any other category require a "permit to procure" before they are transferred.

The US could do the same..

But won't..

The reason that I and my wife will never visit the US.
Just as we would not visit other war zones.
User avatar
keith
Posts: 3705
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 10:23 pm
Location: The Swamp in Victorian Oz
Occupation: Retired Computer Systems Analyst Project Manager Super Coder
Verified: ✅lunatic

Re: Gun Control

#137

Post by keith »

neeneko wrote: Thu Mar 25, 2021 4:41 pm
Dave from down under wrote: Thu Mar 25, 2021 4:38 pm So the modern semi or using one of those readily available conversion kit to full automatic with large capacity magazine would be my choice of fire arm to commit a massacre.
Does it though? There was one guy who used bump stocks, but I can not recall any that used full auto, converted or otherwise. Most of them seem to have been whatever the shooter could get easily or on short notice.
I just found several sites promoting 'fully legal' switches to convert semi-automatic AR15 to full-automatic. Some promote a mod that doubles the firing rate by firing on the pull and the release (paint-ball gun technology apparently).

However you do it, with a bump stock or some modification that somehow still qualifies it as a 'semi-', being able to empty a 50 shot magazine in a few seconds can do damage more than comparable to a fully automatic weapon that can fire twice as fast.

Arguing about fire rates in this context is completely disingenuous.

Deer hunters don't want to shred the animal, they want to eat it, and tan it, and mount its head.
Has everybody heard about the bird?
Dave from down under
Posts: 3908
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2021 4:50 pm
Location: Down here!

Re: Gun Control

#138

Post by Dave from down under »

Ethical hunting - if you aren’t sure that you will kill cleanly with the shot, don’t shoot.
User avatar
keith
Posts: 3705
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 10:23 pm
Location: The Swamp in Victorian Oz
Occupation: Retired Computer Systems Analyst Project Manager Super Coder
Verified: ✅lunatic

Re: Gun Control

#139

Post by keith »

Dave from down under wrote: Fri Mar 26, 2021 1:16 am Ethical hunting - if you aren’t sure that you will kill cleanly with the shot, don’t shoot.
I got in a drawn out forum argument once with a someone claiming that Aussies had all their guns stolen by the gummit, were in open rebellion about it, and there were still murders, and etc. etc. etc.

After carefully correcting all his assertions, he continued to rant about target pistols and hunting rifles being banned, etc, etc, etc. I calmly informed him that Australia had recently won an awful lot of medals in shooting at the Olympics for a country that can't obtain target pistols for practicing.

And he continued to rant and rant about hunting rifles. So I had to point out all the Australian hunting magazines that exist (for people who can't hunt?) actually applauded the restrictions. I showed him articles from those magazines that pointed out that there is really nothing in Australia to hunt that really needs anything bigger than a .22, (except perhaps Water Buffalo which are not hunted by your average urban weekend warrior anyway) and hunters can get the firearms they need for hunting. And their mantra was exactly what you say, if you can't fell it with one shot from a .22 then you shouldn't be out in the field endangering everybody else.

Having said that, I don't know what the hunters use on deer down here, if the aforementioned .22 is 'good enough'. I have a friend, who doesn't hunt, but has several friends that do, and another friend with a feral deer problem on his property. He occasionally connects the two for mutual benefit, and I have benefited from the occasional venison steak, but I have no idea what guns they use.

My dad had a 300 Savage (.30 Calibre center fire) back in the day, which even he thought was overmuch for deer but was robust and never faulted. He finally quite hunting altogether when he went out one day, got out of his truck, pulled his gun off the rack, loaded it with one bullet, heard a noise behind him and turned around, shot the deer was that standing 10 feet away, and decided there wasn't anything about the trip that was enjoyable in the least.
Has everybody heard about the bird?
Dave from down under
Posts: 3908
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2021 4:50 pm
Location: Down here!

Re: Gun Control

#140

Post by Dave from down under »

Family and friends shoot (target, hunting, pest control and gunsmith).

Only the pest control friend feels the need for a semi-automatic and that is only when he and his partner are contracted to clear an area. Then it is a matter of not letting any animal escape.

A few miss their favourite guns, but they still get to shoot (or in the case of the gunsmith collect).
Dave from down under
Posts: 3908
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2021 4:50 pm
Location: Down here!

Re: Gun Control

#141

Post by Dave from down under »

One friend hunts* with a passion, I’ll ask him what he uses for dear and pigs.
I’m not sure if he hunts buffaloes, I wouldn’t be surprised if he does (NT/Qld).

*only non native species, for meat from all but fox,dog & cats.
User avatar
sugar magnolia
Posts: 3228
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 12:54 pm

Re: Gun Control

#142

Post by sugar magnolia »

If gun restriction laws don't work, why were the vast majority of the Jan 6 insurrectionists unarmed? The armed militia at the Michigan capitol didn't leave their guns in the car.
User avatar
neeneko
Posts: 1431
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2021 9:32 am

Re: Gun Control

#143

Post by neeneko »

fierceredpanda wrote: Thu Mar 25, 2021 7:55 pm
John Thomas8 wrote: Thu Mar 25, 2021 7:46 pm
neonzx wrote: Thu Mar 25, 2021 5:45 pm
You know where I'm going. The 2nd Amendment in modern times brings nothing but PAIN.
I disagree. Millions of ARs owned by millions of owners have shot no one at all, and will never do so.
Are you serious? The "everybody's doing it" defense?

Millions of people drive their car without a seat belt and don't die in a crash.

Millions of people drive above a .08 and make it home safely.

Millions of people smoke marijuana without hurting anyone.

Dozens of people graze their cattle on federal land without paying the fees.

Try using these excuses with your friendly local law enforcement.
The flip side of this is that it is REAL easy to be in favor of crackdowns or restrictions that do not affect you personally, and it is important to remember that it will impact others and they might have different feelings about rules that they pay the costs than someone who does not. This isn't 'everyone is doing it', is is a reminder that the abstract people who new rules affect actually are people and the vast majority of them have done nothing worse than, say, anyone else who drives.

Even within your comparison.. well, millions of people drive everyday, yet drunk drivers kill all the time. Neither cars or alcohol are prohibited, though there are both laws and educational programs intended to address the overlap between the two that can be so deadly.
User avatar
neonzx
Posts: 6120
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 11:01 am
Location: FloriDUH Hell
Verified: 🤩✅✅✅✅✅🤩

Re: Gun Control

#144

Post by neonzx »

John Thomas8 wrote: Thu Mar 25, 2021 8:04 pm No, I pointing out facts.

And yes, I can tell my local LEO I have a gun in the car and survive, because I'm not an idiot and guns aren't illegal while everything you listed is illegal.
Yeah, but FRP is a defense attorney, so maybe you should listen.
User avatar
fierceredpanda
Posts: 590
Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2021 12:11 pm
Location: BAR Headquarters - Turn left at the portrait of George III
Occupation: Criminal defense attorney. I am not your lawyer. My posts != legal advice.

Re: Gun Control

#145

Post by fierceredpanda »

My point is that the logical syllogism implied by John Thomas8's post, to wit,

Premise 1: Millions of people own ARs
Premise 2: Lots of people who own ARs don't hurt anyone with them
Ergo: ARs are entirely safe and should not be regulated or restricted in any way

is entirely false. My counterexample is that millions of people also drive over the limit without hurting anyone or being caught, yet no sane person would conclude that it therefore follows that drunk driving is an entirely safe activity and drunk driving laws should be struck down. Same with seat belt laws. And speed limits. And any number of other laws designed to protect the public at large.

To think that an AR-15 is somehow beyond the scope of public safety legislation just because of a constitutional amendment drafted by men for whom a "well-armed militia" meant a group of bunch of people with relatively inaccurate single-shot weapons that could fire at best four to six shots per minute is fundamentally insane.
"There's no play here. There's no angle. There's no champagne room. I'm not a miracle worker, I'm a janitor. The math on this is simple. The smaller the mess, the easier it is for me to clean up." -Michael Clayton
User avatar
neeneko
Posts: 1431
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2021 9:32 am

Re: Gun Control

#146

Post by neeneko »

fierceredpanda wrote: Fri Mar 26, 2021 10:37 am My point is that the logical syllogism implied by John Thomas8's post, to wit,
Is that the implication?
I read it as a response specifically to the idea that gun ownership is 'nothing but pain', an extreme statement which I can understand but kinda ignores the millions of people who own guns in the US who find something of value.. and most of them are in favor of regulations too.
User avatar
neonzx
Posts: 6120
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 11:01 am
Location: FloriDUH Hell
Verified: 🤩✅✅✅✅✅🤩

Re: Gun Control

#147

Post by neonzx »

neeneko wrote: Fri Mar 26, 2021 10:55 am Is that the implication?
I read it as a response specifically to the idea that gun ownership is 'nothing but pain', an extreme statement which I can understand but kinda ignores the millions of people who own guns in the US who find something of value.. and most of them are in favor of regulations too.
My statement of 'pain' is real. Many try to deny it or defend it. Like "that is just how it's supposed to be." Time and time again -- after every tragedy. "thoughts and prayers" is all that is offered. We look like undisciplined children to the rest of the world.

We need to grow the hell up.
User avatar
fierceredpanda
Posts: 590
Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2021 12:11 pm
Location: BAR Headquarters - Turn left at the portrait of George III
Occupation: Criminal defense attorney. I am not your lawyer. My posts != legal advice.

Re: Gun Control

#148

Post by fierceredpanda »

neeneko wrote: Fri Mar 26, 2021 10:55 am
fierceredpanda wrote: Fri Mar 26, 2021 10:37 am My point is that the logical syllogism implied by John Thomas8's post, to wit,
Is that the implication?
I read it as a response specifically to the idea that gun ownership is 'nothing but pain', an extreme statement which I can understand but kinda ignores the millions of people who own guns in the US who find something of value.. and most of them are in favor of regulations too.
If he was defending gun ownership generally, why did he respond with a specific defense of ARs? My point (and I think almost everyone's point) has been that owning firearms is one thing, but ARs are uniquely suitable for killing people en masse and not really that suitable for anything else.

I own a Remington 870 pump shotgun for trap shooting and such. Weird how you don't see a lot of massacres carried out with those.
"There's no play here. There's no angle. There's no champagne room. I'm not a miracle worker, I'm a janitor. The math on this is simple. The smaller the mess, the easier it is for me to clean up." -Michael Clayton
User avatar
neeneko
Posts: 1431
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2021 9:32 am

Re: Gun Control

#149

Post by neeneko »

neonzx wrote: Fri Mar 26, 2021 11:02 am My statement of 'pain' is real. Many try to deny it or defend it. Like "that is just how it's supposed to be." Time and time again -- after every tragedy. "thoughts and prayers" is all that is offered. We look like undisciplined children to the rest of the world.

We need to grow the hell up.
Well, yes, we need to grow up. This includes not describing something that brings joy, community, and fulfillment to millions of people as 'nothing but pain'. It is the same 'ah, look at that american hyperbole' we see with things like adult entertainment/sex work or (esp before they were covered by the first amendment) video games...'I only feel pain, so it is only pain'.

And yes, the flip side of that is the gun community needs to be willing to self reflect, identify the areas where there are problems and come up with ways address them. Acknowledging the pain is real is important. Acknowledging the joy is real is also important, otherwise you just back people into corners since people frame things in terms of acknowledging one means dismissing the other. Americans suck at the very concept of alliance.
User avatar
neeneko
Posts: 1431
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2021 9:32 am

Re: Gun Control

#150

Post by neeneko »

fierceredpanda wrote: Fri Mar 26, 2021 11:26 am if he was defending gun ownership generally, why did he respond with a specific defense of ARs? My point (and I think almost everyone's point) has been that owning firearms is one thing, but ARs are uniquely suitable for killing people en masse and not really that suitable for anything else.

I own a Remington 870 pump shotgun for trap shooting and such. Weird how you don't see a lot of massacres carried out with those.
That is a good point. Looking back at the history, there was no previous mention of ARs in that bit of the conversation.

I would argue though, ARs are not unique in their abilities, but in their cultural symbolism. They are trashy low cost varmint guns that got a whole bunch of media attention because of bad action movies, got banned, then became symbols of not just a culture was but of power and fighting in general. Crow, if you are going to go after guns that really have no other purpose than killing people en-mass, various types of handguns would make a lot more sense... smaller, cheaper, just as deadly, and used in far more shootings. But the AR has become a cultural fixation.

As someone who neither owns nor uses either, I would MUCH rather see new rules and regulations tackling handguns, but that is barely on the radar because both sides have become obsessed AR long guns, something that mostly seems to appear in events designed to get media attention.
Post Reply

Return to “U.S. Culture and Media”