Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

6

tnstaec wrote

The state is never going to willingly disempower itself. Just a few years ago people were clamoring for police body cams to curtail their murderous tendencies. They're already finding ways around that.

3

Enkara wrote

I mean if this hypothetical were possible I would support a universal gun ban on everyone, including police and military.

Pretty unlikely though, but I think it would be hilarious watching war footage of soldiers dropping rocks out of cessnas as it's the most deadly weapon that is still available.

3

zer0crash wrote

No. By bestowing the state the powers to control arms you enable authoritarian state accumulation of power.

Gun control will merely ensure that a black market supplies arms to those who really want it (including cops and other authoritarians). So ultimately someone who acquires a gun illegally (or makes one) will very likely not be prevented by any law and its enforcers no matter how many controls you implement.

1

OniLinkPlus wrote

Idealistically, guns would be limited to hunting for food. There should be no need for self defense. We don't live in an ideal world, we need to be able to defend ourselves, especially and primarily from oppressive regimes.

That being said, guns are dangerous tools. In the wrong hands, many innocent lives can easily be lost, as we've seen countless times in the US over the last several years. We need to find some compromise between defending ourselves from authority and defending ourselves from those who are not capable of properly handling guns.

So honestly I'm not sure. At the very least, we need to restrict what types of guns are available (many guns that currently exist are overkill for any reasonable purpose - who needs an automatic for hunting or self defense?! these guns are designed for slaughter), and we need to be especially restrictive of authority having guns and other weapons (preferably a complete ban) (even better if we eliminate the concept of authority but we're not there yet).

We could further restrict who is allowed to have guns, but that gets into the question of "who gets to decide?" which doesn't have good answers. Perhaps a community training service to ensure those with guns are properly trained? But then we're still granting authority to the people running the training sessions. I don't think there are any easy answers.