Oh, hey, I just had a brilliant idea for solving our guns & terrorists problem!

[agilebrit]

We'll just pass a law that says that people who plan to go on an ideologically-driven shooting rampage are prohibited from owning guns! BOOM, problem sol--

Wait, you say that won't help? You think that's ridiculous? You say that people who are going to go on a shooting rampage won't follow a law like that?

Well, genius, what the everlivin' fuck makes you think that they're going to follow any other law you pass concerning mag capacity, type of firearm, or background checks?

I saw an article the other day from an AR15 owner saying that "oh, if we just limited mags to ten rounds, it would fix everything because they'd have to reload and it would maybe give people time to charge him and disarm him." And I realize that this has been proposed and shot down more times than I can count, but, uh, in this specific case? The Orlando shooter was texting his wife and posting to Facebook during his rampage. I am pretty damned sure that having to reload a few extra times would not have fazed him. This guy's naivete was super cute but ultimately dangerous and not helpful.

This is assuming that if you suddenly pass a law saying "ten-round mags only!" that the high-cap ones people already own will just suddenly disappear like fucking magic or something. Basically, you're going to hamstring the law-abiding while the criminals and terrorists laugh up their sleeves at your stupid, stupid, knee-jerk Do-Something-Itis.

Comments

[curiouswombat.livejournal.com]

Just because one step does not cover the entire distance of a marathon does not mean that you should not take that step.

But, by now, most of the rest of the world is past caring about whether you all eventually kill each other or not.

[agilebrit.livejournal.com]

I guess it depends on where you want to get to. An awkward step backwards that ends up hamstringing the runner doesn't help either.

[curiouswombat.livejournal.com]

Perhaps, in that case - you should all decide on the route rather than refusing to move...

[agilebrit.livejournal.com]

I think asking us all to decide something is probably too much to ask for in a country of 330 million people, especially when we have such disparate cultures as "Southern California" and "Utah" (which are vastly different from each other). Especially when the Utah solution (which would be "do away with gun-free zones") and the California solution (which would be "ban guns") are polar opposites.

Which is, I suppose, why we have states' rights. I live in Utah because I believe that self-defense is a civil right. Other people are free to move to California or New York or Chicago where firearm ownership/carrying is more restricted.

[selenite.livejournal.com]

To continue the metaphor, we've decided to take different paths.