Guns / 2A

Oracle Xek0s8
Feb 26, 2018 7 Comments

Many of the gun topics here are wild flame fests filled with misinformation.

If anyone wants to discuss/understand the 2A side seriously, feel free to PM me. My background is US military vet, competitive shooter, firearms instructor, and follower of 2A litigation. Not here to do your research for you but to share viewpoints beneath the surface to consider.

One thing I should mention is terminology: "assault weapon" is a politicians' (as opposed to an industry) term that's become a moving target, redefined often to expand its reach. It's a tactic that establishes mistrust and further polarizes people.

I see fractured discussions in my network that often preach to their own choirs. But mutual understanding can only happen by talking to the other side in good faith.

comments

Want to comment? LOG IN or SIGN UP
TOP 7 Comments
  • Microsoft Whztzy
    Ok, I’ll bite. My question is one you’ve probably heard before but i have yet to receive a good answer.

    Drivers require a drivers license.

    On airplanes, we can’t take more than 100ml because some idiot tried to make a bomb with water

    On planes we have to take off our shoes because some idiot tried to make a bomb / conceal a weapon.

    We have made so many stringent and what seemingly unnecessary laws for the 99.999% of people that are not criminals on planes or are not crazy drivers so why are guns the exception to this? Why is it that the NRA or other folks believe that one restriction will lead to other restrictions?
    Feb 27, 2018 4
    • Microsoft BadRobot
      My guess is that you will never get a satisfactory answer to these, because quite frankly there isn't one. What I do not understand is why this has to be so difficult? It's quite simple really.. Guns in the hands of the wrong individual can get someone killed. Hence you need proper licensing requirements and scrutiny. That is what the rest of the world has already realized and acted upon.
      No,do not give me your hunting / personal security excuse. You do not need a semi auto to defend yourself. You do not live in Taliban land! Also, if by chance a group of armed mercenaries were to suddenly jump your ass, because you stole money from the Cartel, then chances are that you will get capped, whether you have a semi or not.
      This has nothing to do with your right to arms and the constitution. It has everything to do with the money made in trading arms, without any regard for safety or value of life!
      Feb 27, 2018
    • Microsoft Whztzy
      To bring up the constitution seems ridiculous. when the constitution was written people had bayonets - right to bear arms is in context of a militia. Us government would destroy any militia today so to refer to 1776 as a right is utter bullshit because driving should be a right too and probably more so than wielding a gun. I think that’s where we disagree and people start to get upset because premises and assumptions start to feel really forced. Why you feel having a gun is more intrinsic of a right than driving I’ll never fully understand - because the constitution says so. So why not just legalize bayonets. They didn’t have cars back then.

      That being said - it seems like you’re for deregulating airport security but we haven’t so why not just meet the same standards as airport security - because it’s unnecessary restrictions.

      My goal isn’t to take your guns. My goal is to take some Action that is similar to airport security. We haven’t had another shoe bomber or water bomber so those have done their part. We don’t know if putting same restrictions will work with guns so why not try.
      Feb 27, 2018
    • Cisco / Eng zGcY85
      So this is a core issue with the debate. Many arguing for more laws are completely unaware there are more than 20,000 laws pertaining to regulating guns in the US already on the books.

      Furthermore, it’s because the politicians proposing these laws have flat out stated that they will continue proposing incremental restrictions, so we’re merely taking them at their word for it. Seriously. There are a multitude of videos, articles, quotes, etc on it spanning 50+ years. They haven’t stopped or slowed down every time they get one passed - they just keep going.
      Nov 17, 2018
    • Cisco / Eng zGcY85
      Think of it from the perspective of Jim Crow laws. When one law gets struck down, they come up with 20 more that will have the same or worse effect but from a different angle that hasn’t been ruled on yet. It’s why you keep hearing about “loopholes” to everything - some clueless politician goes “ok, we have too many people speeding, so no more V8 engines allowed in cars. They’re too fast and unnecessary.” Auto manufacturers go “ok, fine” and produce a twin turbo V6 that puts out twice the horsepower of the old V8. Politicians go “we have to close that loophole!” and ban twin turbo V6s in cars. Meanwhile, trucks with V8s have continued to grow in market share. Politicians eventually realize they only specified “cars with V8s” and not trucks and start to scream about manufacturers exploiting loopholes and being uncaring of lives lost to speeding deaths. They proceed to ban V8 engines in trucks. So now trucks start getting turbo V6s, eco diesel engines, etc putting out just as much power.

      Round and round and round we go.
      Nov 17, 2018
  • Google / Eng gsu
    Why should an 18 years old be allowed to buy an AR-15 but not a beer?
    Feb 27, 2018 1
    • Microsoft BadRobot
      Seriously? I need to know what it is that you're smoking!!
      Feb 27, 2018

Salary
Comparison

    Real time salary information from verified employees