I watched 1 minute 23 seconds of that video. It basically says having bigger magazines is favorable for police officers and self-defenders. Did I miss anything?
If guns are designed to kill people, they do a very poor job of it, since with 400 Million guns they murder maybe 10000 people, that’s 1 in 40000. Pretty bad design there.
But they are not, really.
Tell that to all the militaries of the world. I’m sure that they’d be pleased to know that they’ve been wasting their time and money on guns.
If it makes you feel better, how about I rephrase it as “designed to kill and project the the threat of killing”
Nope, not that either. Unless you could hunting as “killing”, which of course it is, but not in the context here. Target and skeet shooters kill nothing, Olympic athlete shooters kill nothing, gun collectors kill nothing, cow-boy action shooters kill nothing, etc.
And people who buy a gun for home defense hope desperately they will never have to kill anyone.
Maybe we could paint them pink or something so they won’t look so bad-ass! Or maybe rainbow colored. Bet that would help.
It’s all simulated killing, dude. You can’t have live targets because its illegal, obviously. For competion, you need to level the playing field and not have it come down to chance how critters are going to act. Skeet is simulating birds. Olympic biathlon is simulated hunting. Target shooters are generally aiming at human silhouettes, for fucks sake. Granted, I’ve only been to a dozen or so ranges, but every single time the default target is a human silhouette.
Gun collectors, fine. They should be ok with them being non working then, right?
I don’t know what you mean by “cowboy action shooter”. Please explain.
Edit: does it make you feel better if I say “destroy” instead of “kill”
It’s a particular type of shooting event / competition. The participants typically dress like cowboys and use cowboy-ish guns: revolvers, lever-action rifles, etc.
Watch some of this to get the idea.
ETA: the rest of you should probably watch it too, to gain a modicum of understanding of just how quickly someone with a bit of training / practice can fire lever- or pump-action long guns.
Sam, How about a one for one trade in program for musket loaders? Better yet we issue a musket to to every man woman and child in the country paid for by the scrap metal from all the melted down bullets (have you see the price of lead and brass lately?)
As a Progressive socialist gun owner. I too question the efficacy of melting down weapons when there are millions and millions of them out there I can’t imagine getting them all. I would happily give up my guns if it would help. It seems to me that the prudent course is not try to reinvent the wheel . Canada’s number one sport is hunting yet they have a tiny fraction of the gun violence we do. Why not look at the vast majority of free societies and use their best practices. This problem has be largely solved elsewhere and our do-nothing attitude has ended up with mass shootings. Australia maybe is a good working model for us to start with?
Gun rights advocates don’t care about other countries and their approach to gun rights. American gun rights advocates believe that owning guns is a “natural right” that cannot be denied to them by the government, based on the constitution and various court case rulings.
Also, Canada’s number one sport is hockey. Hunting is not a “sport”. Nothing that involves being still and waiting while being vewy vewy quiet is a sport.
I think the main points were that smaller capacity magazines don’t slow a shooter down very much, and some twenty feet cannot be covered during magazine reload.
Well, as long as you feel your ‘rights’ are more important than people routinely getting gunned down on our streets and in our schools, then fuck yeah, you have it coming to you.
Unfortunately, we’ve created a society that’s extremely car-dependent. That’s not true of guns.
FWIW, when we lefties advocate for better public transportation and fewer restrictions on dense building around subway stops and the like, so that more people can do without cars, ‘conservatives’ oppose us at every turn.
Remember back when Obama’s stimulus passed, and it had funds for high-speed rail? Republican governors all over the place simply refused to take the money. Comparatively sane conservatives like George Will said public transportation was socialism. Chris Christie vetoed a new (and now, desperately needed) train tunnel under the Hudson to NYC.
You have no right to talk about cars in this context.
I hate using public transportation. In NY however, it is probably less hassle to use it.
If you have ever gone target shooting you will probably appreciate firearms as more than just killing machines.
Exactly, in the linked video you have two shooters doing various demonstrations, one experienced shooter, and one novice, times are compared…
They demonstrate with a Glock 19 semiauto pistol, an AR-15 rifle, revolvers, and a 1911 semiauto pistol** with differing Mag capacities to show how little variation Mag capacity makes
** the 7 round capacity 1911, with Mag changes, was able to put 21 rounds on target in around 9.6 seconds, the fastest of the bunch, even faster than the “evil” AR…
A “New York Reload” of a series of six shot revolvers was next fastest…
Mag capacity is largely irrelavent
It’s all well and good to feel righteous in your use of petty insults against political opponents. That’s fine. Whatever. My point was that it’s moronic to then expect cooperation from the people you’re insulting.
Oh, forgot to add, the 1911 pistol design is over ONE HUNDRED years old, and is a semiautomatic…
Yes, I remember. That absolute shit-show of a failure had nothing to do with Republicans and everything to do with classic California liberal incompetence.
You can probably imagine how little value I place on what you think I have a “right to talk about” or not.
Exactly.
Firstly, “London” didn’t ban guns, Great Britain did (possibly the whole UK - I can’t remember what the situation in NI is off the top of my head).
Secondly, “scary-looking knives” have been illegal to carry around for decades now in the UK. Funnily enough, once guns stopped being a material threat, police were then able to focus on knife crime, and that fell rapidly too. With guns and knives heavily restricted, homicide rates fell because fights were far less likely to become lethal (this led to a bulge in the assault rate because that’s where non-lethal fights were recorded). What didn’t happen was a sudden surge of screwdriver-related assaults, because that’s just a paranoid fantasy.
Admittedly knife crime is currently on the rise again, but this has absolutely nothing to do with guns being banned and everything to do with right-wingers cutting police numbers by 20,000. The fact that the “gun rights” contingent in the US - including Donald “stab stab” Trump - are blatantly misrepresenting this situation tells you everything you need to know: that they’re terrified that people might see that banning guns actually works.
The gun problem in the US is certainly driven by “large scale social problems of our own making”, but prime among them is the fetishization of guns.
When your response to repeated mass shootings is to continue chanting “thoughts and prayers!” and then keep working to loosen restrictions on gun ownership including to mentally ill people, it’s less a “hateful attitude” or “petty insults” and more an accurate description of reality. I’m sorry if that upsets you, but thank you for confirming that your fragile feelings are more important than trying to prevent the murder of schoolchildren.