• PersnickityPenguin@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    10
    ·
    1 year ago

    But it’s irrelevant, people just don’t want violent murderers to have the ability to fire large volumes of bullets at them first thing in the morning.

    FFS, let us get a cup of coffee first!

    • FluorideMind@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      1 year ago

      If you really feel so strongly about it, you would educate yourselves the small amount required to even talk about what you’re trying to ban.

      • Jeremyward@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        I would be for a ban of semi auto weapons period. Bolt action is more than good enough for hunting or target shooting, heck even home defence, a shotgun is pump action but still highly effective.

          • Jeremyward@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            1 year ago

            You are gonna defend yourself against Abrams tanks, Apache helicopters and predator drones with a rifle?

            • SupraMario@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              5
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              Remember you live next to a gun owner, so when they’re blowing up his house, your shits getting wrecked as well.

              Also Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan all would like a word with you.

      • Jyek@lemmynsfw.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Then how about in instances where it is unlikely for the vast majority of people in one of the most populated countries in the world to learn about something like guns and how they work, we just have a registry of firearms that are approved for use in the US. Manufacturers can form fill and submit new equipment to be on that list legalizing them to be sold to the public through authorized dealers and then we don’t ever have to worry about the broad sweeping bans on weapons that probably shouldn’t have been in the hands of the aforementioned underqualified, less than educated civilians. Especially in cases where those civilians may intend to do harm to other, less than educated civilians.

        It should not be a requirement that I know how a weapon works to fear harm from that weapon. I should not have to know the difference between the pomel and the guard of a sword to be allowed to fear being cut apart by one. Telling people to educate themselves does nothing for your argument. All you are saying is “I’m smarter than you and you’re wrong.” And that’s just not helpful in cases where regardless of one’s education on the matter of guns, we still hold different views on which guns people should be allowed to carry.

        I do not care if it’s a clip or a magazine or if it’s bump-fire or fully automatic or machine automatic. You know the intention of people’s words when they are concerned about these matters and want legal restrictions put in place. It should not be accessible to civilians to fire 10s of bullets a second.

        Preventing mass shootings from happening is a matter of restricted and monitored access. There are hundreds of countries where gun violence is a non-issue. Why is it an issue here? How do we be more like countries where it is not an issue? What steps can we take to not fear for our lives? I don’t like having to look over my shoulder when I go out.