Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re:How is this newsworthy? (Score 1) 278

We don't actually have a right to drive cars. Unless I missed an amendment to the Constitution or unless your state's one mentions it.

I wouldn't, in principle, be opposed to the idea of gun licenses as long as they were on a "shall issue" basis with actual USEFUL training and disqualifiers. The problem is that anti-gun people aren't interested in those things, and even if they were they've proven they can't be trusted. So giving a law that can be twisted is extraordinarily dangerous.

Comment Re:Ah well. (Score 1) 278

There was a spike in 2015, but before that we were at the lowest murder rate since the late 60s. I'd hazard a guess that most people in the US literally don't know a single person that's been murdered, I sure don't, though admittedly I'm not very social. I know one person that committed suicide and another that almost certainly did the same, no one that was murdered. The reality is that we are safer than we've been in decades, but since we've got 350+ million people there's still enough going on to fill the news, and since fear sells that what they put on.

Comment Re: Militant Slashdot (Score 1) 278

Semi-auto weapons are the BEST for each of the things you listed. Self defense practically requires semi-auto as manually operated weapons can leave you in a much worse place if your first shot doesn't work. Semi-auto weapons are ideal for hunting because they allow rapid follow-up shots in case the first shot doesn't work as well. For sport they're far and beyond the best for anything short of ultra-long range shooting because it's a lot more fun to shoot semi-auto. Though to be fair there IS something to be said for working the action of a bolt or lever gun too.

Can you explain why semi-auto WOULDN'T be the best choice for any of those things?

Comment Re: Militant Slashdot (Score 1) 278

Handgun control is obviously the best way to reduce crime and, if I had the option to set the gun laws, would be the primary focus. The fact that it is rarely brought up should make you wonder about the motivations of those pushing the laws.

My basic suspicion is that the hoplophobic politicians know exactly what's going on. They're aware that an "assault weapons" ban will do literally nothing to reduce crime, but that's not the point. The goal is disarmament, but that can't be achieved as long as there's a large group of shooting enthusiasts that are willing and able to politically and physically resist confiscation. So the goal isn't to implement laws that will actually reduce crime, it's to introduce crime that will make gun ownership more difficult and less appealing, long-term result being the reduction of gun owners as a voting bloc to a size that they can ignore and implement any laws they wish.

That being said Hanlon's Razor certainly COULD apply, but it seems like it's been going on too long to be simple stupidity.

Slashdot Top Deals

God made the integers; all else is the work of Man. -- Kronecker

Working...