You must log in or register to comment.

zorblax wrote

Fully agree. It's only because I live in liberaland that I'm not a gun nut.


RedEmmaSpeaks wrote

I have mixed feelings. On one hand, I respect everyone's right to self-defense and protection from the State, but at the same time, most of these recent mass shootings are committed by entitled White Dude bros who usually have some domestic violence charges; to the extent they have an ideology, it's more "I haven't been given what I deserve so I'm going to take it out on everyone else" rather than any kind of belief system.

Regarding domestic violence cases, while if the partner also has a gun, it can level the playing field greatly, there are limits to what a gun can do. The asshole who shot up a church in Texas, had been charged with beating his toddler stepson badly enough to break the kid's skull. I don't think a gun would have helped that poor kid and it's really fucking appalling that the asshole still had no problems getting a gun after all that.

Also in all these gun debates, I find myself thinking in terms of practicality. So many of these assault weapons look cool and can pump a lot of bullets into a lot of people pretty fast, but at the same time, they don't really serve any purpose besides filling a lot of people with a lot of bullets. You can't go hunting with them, unless you don't want there to be any usable meat left on the animal, and they tend to be fussy and prone to jamming. Maybe if you're in controlled circumstances, an assault weapon does okay, but war rarely involves controlled circumstances. Probably good old-fashioned hunting rifles and shotguns would serve the movement better than Uzis and whatever; they're sturdy weapons that can stand up to a lot and can be used for more purposes than just killing people.