This is more tersely called sunk cost fallacy

So, what you're saying is that the recent attempts to force a "the last massive gun rights limitations were passed under Raegan" narrative are as false as I said they were?

Yep. Not that the anti-gun lobby allows facts to get in the way of a narrative they wish to force.

As for the AWB shit, that's just retarded. I think most people understand at this point just how stupid that ban was. It was basically as pointless as the 1986 ban on civilian ownership of newly manufactured machine guns.

BTW, you don't have to "educate" me on how the history of gun control worldwide has been to disarm marginalized groups in order to enable more effective persecution. Gun control was originally pushed in the South by Democrats in order to keep the African Americans under their thumb. If you think I have a problem with armed blacks (or anyone else) then you're making baseless, incorrect assumptions. It's too bad that gun control laws prevented blacks from being able to defend themselves from lynchings and so forth.

"For the record, I support freedom of speech with strict prior restraint on publication, regular censorship of inciteful or seditious content, and mandatory review by a cultural diversity panel to ensure nothing will be perceived as libelous or offensive to anyone now or in the future."

BTW, you seem intelligent enough to understand that the microstamping firing pin concept is a completely unworkable fantasy technology, on the level of CSI's "enhance" video command. If you still support microstamping after doing a trivial amount of research, you will be implicitly outed as someone whose primary interest is a ban via setting impossible criteria... much like how Congress originally tried to ban marijuana by instituting a tax on it and then refusing to allow payment of said tax (that was unconstitutional, BTW).

Funny you should say that, because that's exactly what the majority of Congress and the President did in 1994 and tried to do again after Sandy Hook. Feinstein (the CCW-permit-holding hypocrite) is on record saying she wished she had been able to implement a complete confiscation at that the 1994 juncture.

Oh, did you mean to say "Almost no one wants to actually 'take away the ones we feel like letting you keep'?"

If so, tautologies are tautologies.

Let's not pretend there isn't a strong desire to recapitulate UK gun laws here, complete with bans and (ideally) confiscation.

Feel free to corroborate your claim. I've been seeing this "President Reagan implemented gun control" meme lately.

I'm going to stop you right here if you are referring to the Hughes Amendment poison pill to the Firearm Owners Protection Act that Charlie Rangel (D, NY) gaveled through on an obviously opposed voice vote at 3 AM.

So, what examples of Reagan's federal executive action do you have to support this ridiculous claim?

If true, this is some sort of inverse Darwin Award: failure to be removed from the gene pool, saved by sheer stupidity. A more intelligent person would have just turned 180 degrees and jumped off with their goal condition now satisfied.

I love this idea. If you discharge 300 kJ in a quarter second, that's 1.2 megawatts.

They need to continue working on these until we have pocket-sized grenades. I'm sure a megawatt or two could be used to coax some shrapnel into substantial acceleration. Or they could easily generate high power Xrays to irradiate everyone in a certain radius.

"Welcome to the future. It's just like your time, except our suicide vests are made of supercapacitors, and while our phones are paper thin now they don't fit in your pocket because they measure 25 cm diagonally"

If you're calling bullshit on my "armchair psychology" then I suggest you look in the mirror. You are speaking with absolute certainty regarding how you would have reacted in a hypothetical scenario.

Good luck with your grasp of reality, Freud.

Yes, pretty much the only hope is a legal challenge, but what are the odds that will work?

Basically the law is written to allow the agency to decide whether to forbear on banning this ammo. In an Office Space-type move, ATFE "fixed the glitch". Thanks to civil service, we can't exactly directly vote to recall the bureaucrats making these decisions.

As for legislation, in this case the shoe is on the other foot for the Republicans. There aren't enough to override a veto.

They could try to tack it into must-pass legislation, but Harry Reid is all too willing to use brinksmanship over shutdowns, as demonstrated by the Homeland Security funding/immigration debacle. That is "irony" given how much they whined about these tactics when they were majority.

Oh, I read what you wrote just fine. You were just being overly dramatic. Because if you truly had sufficient rage to murder someone then you wouldn't have cared that your pencil was an apparently insufficient weapon or that you might have to walk 10m to obtain another improvised weapon.

None of this has anything to do with whether it's a wise idea to issue handguns to school kids. I'm just calling bullshit on your distorted assessment of your emotional state.

Hey, shill, remember how all those other firearm restrictions implemented in the US were immediately enforced with no grandfathering? Like when the Clinton AWB was passed and they suddenly required everyone to turn in all the "eeevul black rifles", standard capacity mags, and so on?

Oh wait, no, they grandfathered everything in circulation because Feinstein (who through stereotypical liberal hypocrisy has a CCW permit for herself), et al, couldn't summon the votes for a retroactive ban.

Same thing applies here: what's in circulation will be allowed to be sold.

What, are you 12? I presume you can grok the implication of a forward ban. Hell, you probably bought the ammo with the intention of scalping it once the supply dries up.

You are a failed pedant, and now you resort to moving the goalposts?

Fact: Obama promised to continue doing everything in his power to combat gun violence through executive action.

Fact: The ATF, a department of the executive branch, is banning commonly used sporting ammo.

Yet here you sit and shill, trying first to argue that Obama didn't use "executive orders" (which isn't what the poster said anyway), then you claim Obama didn't promise to try to implement gun control via executive action (which is either odiously disingenuous or ignorant of you), and now you are trying to claim that the stuff Obama did as part of his attempt to implement gun control... wasn't an attempt to implement gun control.

Check.

You're a shill.

"After the legislation failed, Mr. Obama vowed to take whatever steps his administration could through executive action. He later issued 25 executive orders intended to tighten the rules for gun ownership."

NYT

BTW, the post you replied to said "executive action", not "executive order", you doubly-failed pedant.

Oh good lord. How pedantic are you trying to be?

Obama promised to implement as much gun control as he could without involving Congress, later, ATF issues new decision reclassifying commonly used sporting ammunition in order to ban it. Would you be happy if the technically incorrect term "executive order" were replaced by "Presidentially-directed regulatory policy alteration"?

I'll remind you that executive orders aren't in the Constitution, but are derived from an implicit constructive reading of the law. So, be careful how far you push the pedantry.

My personal perspective on armed schoolchildren aside, I can only imagine you spent significant time in juvie for your repeated vehicular, IED, knife, sharpened pencil, metal chair leg, brick, and rock assaults on your peers.

You know, because as you said, not having access to a firearm was the only thing that prevented you from using that kind of weapon to attack people.

Hopefully you were able to keep your juvenile criminal record sealed, though.