I'm bored and we haven't had a good rhetorical brawl about gun control lately as far as I know, so...Biden got caught telling some fibs about gun control and gun sales.
President Joe Biden claims the 10-year assault weapons ban that he helped shepherd through the Senate as part of the 1994 crime bill "brought down these mass killings." But the raw numbers, when adjusted for population and other factors, aren't so clear on that.
Man, I was hoping this was going to be about hair cuts.
I would add that owning a gun doesn't protect you from criminals. It's just a good way of getting yourself killes. 'Assualt rifle' ban doesn't decrease killings *in America.) Both sides of this debate are terrible
If you don't do your due diligence as a gun owner and learn proper firearm safety, and properly maintain your firearm(s) while getting in the range time, absolutely. All too many don't, and frankly, from my experience as a gun owner right-wing gun nuts are generally the single most incompetent group of gun owners when it comes to any and all of the above.
'Assualt rifle' ban doesn't decrease killings *in America.
See, this right here is the problem with this aspect of the debate. It's not an assault rifle ban; those are already banned, with the exception of certain firearms that must be purchased only after getting a thorough background check and/or writ of approval by law enforcement (in certain jurisdictions), and paying a tax stamp as per the 1934 NFA. My thoughts on that are another matter, I actually oppose that as a regressive tax the only purpose of which is to keep firearms out of the hands of the poor, in itself a form of class warfare.
But, what we have is an assault "weapons" ban, and by visual aid is the best way I can frame this. Which of these three guns are assault weapons, and which are not?
Answer below, spoilered:
It's a trick question, they're all Ruger Mini-14's. It's a gas-operated, rotating bolt, semi-automatic rifle that fires 5.56mm NATO/.223 Winchester. In other words, it's functionally identical to an AR-15. Yet, it's practically never a target by gun control advocates. Wasn't banned under the Brady bill, hasn't been the target of a ban since.
The first picture's why. An "assault weapon" is a firearm that looks scary or has a bad rep, regardless of ballistics or lethality. That's basically it.
He is and isn't right about receivers in particular, but generally spot on the money with everything else. With home-built AR-15's, yeah it's a problem because owners buy, mix and match upper and lower receiver, and to get to where Biden seemingly wants, the ATF would have to mate and track serialized upper and lower receivers by owner, which is not a reasonable expectation. But, that's not the end of the story, either.
I own a Sig-Sauer P320. It's a modular platform, I can change sizes and even calibers if I wanted. Mine's currently configured in compact size and chambered for 9x19mm Parabellum, but all it takes is a kit that includes a new barrel, slide, grip, and mags, and I can be shooting .357 Sig, .40 S&W, or .45 ACP. In essence, what I bought was a serialized receiver/trigger assembly and everything else is academic.
That modularity is simply what contemporary firearms incorporate now as a matter of convenience and cost reduction to the consumer. It was a shock to me when I started buying again -- in 2009 when I purchased a Mossberg 500 that is just as modular as any AR-15 or my P320 -- and trying to regulate that isn't going to work as intended.
If you don't do your due diligence as a gun owner and learn proper firearm safety, and properly maintain your firearm(s) while getting in the range time, absolutely. All too many don't, and frankly, from my experience as a gun owner right-wing gun nuts are generally the single most incompetent group of gun owners when it comes to any and all of the above.
Out of interest, who thought that was a good idea to begin with? Someone who didn't know what they were talking about and didn't spend 30 seconds on google, or someone who wanted to pass a gun law that might look like it did something without doing anything to appease both sides?
The assault weapons ban was stupid in 1994 and it's stupid now (and is a huge reason that so many AR15s flooded the market in the 2000s).
The problem isn't the guns themselves really, or not having enough gun laws, it's lack of enforcement of current laws.
The number one shared trait of perpetrators of gun violence (and violence in general) is domestic violence and domestic abuse, but law enforcement doesn't treat domestic violence seriously. If domestic abusers couldn't buy or own guns and this was ACTUALLY ENFORCED and domestic violence cases were investigated and treated seriously it would cut gun violence more than anything else.
Of course that would also mean a massive percentage of police officers wouldn't be able to own guns so that's never going to happen.
The assault weapons ban was stupid in 1994 and it's stupid now (and is a huge reason that so many AR15s flooded the market in the 2000s).
The problem isn't the guns themselves really, or not having enough gun laws, it's lack of enforcement of current laws.
The number one shared trait of perpetrators of gun violence (and violence in general) is domestic violence and domestic abuse, but law enforcement doesn't treat domestic violence seriously. If domestic abusers couldn't buy or own guns and this was ACTUALLY ENFORCED and domestic violence cases were investigated and treated seriously it would cut gun violence more than anything else.
Of course that would also mean a massive percentage of police officers wouldn't be able to own guns so that's never going to happen.
Has anyone thought about regulating the primers made in ammunition? People say it's impossible to ban guns, just ban the primers on ammo(of course you have to get rid of 2a first) Of course I don't know how I feel about throwing all of President Nina Turner or AOC's political capital behind this, and not M4A, GND, or 15 dollar min wage or even free college. We could save more pain by getting M4A vs just banning all the guns which would save less pain in my political policy calculus. But if you did ban the primers you could make most ammo in the western hemisphere too risky to use by 50 years from now.
Has anyone thought about regulating the primers made in ammunition? People say it's impossible to ban guns, just ban the primers on ammo(of course you have to get rid of 2a first) Of course I don't know how I feel about throwing all of President Nina Turner or AOC's political capital behind this, and not M4A, GND, or 15 dollar min wage or even free college. We could save more pain by getting M4A vs just banning all the guns which would save less pain in my political policy calculus. But if you did ban the primers you could make most ammo in the western hemisphere too risky to use by 50 years from now.
Like banning them entirely? Well, the problem is then you have to deal with market for military, police and export, so that's a no go right there. Banning civilian ownership might as well just go for banning bullet sales to civies since it's effectively the same thing.
Considering we can't even get universal background checks passed in the US, I doubt banning bullets will happen anytime soon. And amending the constitution at this point feels fucking impossible. If the Equal Rights Amendment can't get ratified, how the hell are we gonna get something even more controversial changed?
Like banning them entirely? Well, the problem is then you have to deal with market for military, police and export, so that's a no go right there. Banning civilian ownership might as well just go for banning bullet sales to civies since it's effectively the same thing.
Considering we can't even get universal background checks passed in the US, I doubt banning bullets will happen anytime soon. And amending the constitution at this point feels fucking impossible. If the Equal Rights Amendment can't get ratified, how the hell are we gonna get something even more controversial changed?
You move the Overton window bit by bit, a ghost gun ban here, another gun accessory here, and then an assault weapons ban, then a handgun ban, then an ammo ban.
I'd prefer "femocrat", "neofem", "technofem", or maybe "femboug", but there really isn't a cute and sexy hybrid term I can think of for "neoliberal feminist", "bourgeois feminist", or "feminist technocrat". Because let's be dead honest, post-third wave feminism is largely an ideological wasteland when it comes to anything approaching leftist thought -- just a whole lotta bourgeois, and petit bourgeois useful idiots, appropriating leftist lingo.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.