No, because we’re not licensed for that category of gun. We can only use what guns we have the appropriate category for, and hunters etc cannot get the category that includes pump shotguns and semi-auto .22 rifles. No category/endorsement = not licenced for that, can’t use it.
The difficulty you’re having it finding out what should be a fairly straightforward thing (and that’s not a criticism of you at all, btw) is one of the many issues shooters have with the gun laws here - they’re well intentioned but a complicated, often nonsensical mess, and any good faith effort to get them straightened out gets emotionally screamed down by people who hate everyone and everything on the firearm user’s side of the discussion.
Perhaps they know beforehand what you think about them. “Screamed down” and “hate everyone and everything on our side”- doesn’t sound like a good faith effort on your side when it comes to negotiating.
Yeah, complaining because being “reasonable” in a Pit thread hasn’t preserved you from a “shitshow” of “disgusting abuse”, or claiming that such abuse somehow demonstrates that the people abusing you are “incapable of arguing in good faith”, is missing the point.
Vituperation and venom in the Pit don’t have to be reasonable, they don’t have to be proportionate, they don’t have to moderate their “tone” if their target is responding with moderation, they don’t have to be “dialed back”. People are allowed to vent all they want in the Pit, and to take out their anger on anybody who seems to be supporting whatever it is they’re primarily angry about. The only thing they can’t do, and the only thing the Mods have to ding them for if they do do, is commit actual violations of the rules of the Pit.
Also, nothing that people post in the Pit can be taken as a reliable guide to the standards of debate that they hold themselves to in other forums, or to their ability to discuss something thoughtfully. Look at the number of usually implacable adversaries calmly discussing “What are Rights For?” in the concurrent GD thread, for example.
There are in fact plenty of us who are willing to discuss calmly even in the Pit, but that doesn’t mean the Pit has to be treated as just a slightly spicier debate forum with a little more profanity and invective. This here is a safe space for full-on rage, hatred and contempt, among other things, whether rational or irrational; and even those of us who don’t use it that way should not expect to be exempt from the phenomenon. If we don’t like it, we can ignore it.
Another thank you for changing your avatar. It’s a much more friendly and welcome image. Most of us choose icons that are in some subtle way important or meaningful to us. The image of a pile of bullets was quite frankly almost like advance notice saying “Warning! Gun nut here. Reasoned gun debate will not be possible.”
The gun laws there resulted in a great reduction in shootings. When the laws were set up the way gun fetishists want, more people were shot to death. It’s understandable why your side has very little credibility.
Listening to all these gun fetishists whine about being treated unfairly is a bit much. They want to pursue policies that get people slaughtered, but they don’t want us to make them feel bad for doing it. It’s a bit like members of NAMBLA complaining because people keep calling them baby fuckers.
This is the pit, deal with it or run home and stroke your gun until,you calm down.
Is it really all that different than being “screamed down” by republicans who arguably “hate everyone and everything on our side” when democrats suggest some minor gun control laws? Democrats asking for something like universal background checks is a good faith effort to get some gun control laws in place, but write up a proposal for a law and getting ‘screamed down’ would be preferable to republicans and lobbyist taking going to the media with the intent of rallying up half the country against you.
Doesn’t even have to be gun control, it can even be something they wanted (lowering gas prices, propping up the manufacturers during the (baby) formula recall), but if you suggest it, you’ll get torn apart because you’re not them and therefor wrong.
I don’t think the problem here is that the dems aren’t negotiating in good faith.
Granted, I don’t know the politics surrounding gun laws where Martini is, but I do think that someone getting really angry, even if you knew ahead of time they were going to get that angry, isn’t necessarily due to something you did wrong.
We hear 5-10 rounds is standard, so I need 10. Okay…, so would having 10 rounds as a maximum be acceptable? NO, there should be no limit!
I wouldn’t have a problem with the argument for 5 rounds. If a compelling case can be made for 10 (which I doubt), then I’d consider it on its merits. But ultimately, the discussion is not in good faith, as they are against any limit at all.
And honestly, I’m not even in that much a favor of such restrictions. I’m for universal background checks for all gun transfers, as I of the opinion that that will do more to lessen the severity of gun violence overall, even if it doesn’t do much about mass shootings.
But when gun advocates start giving such disingenuous and whiny excuses, it does make me more tempted to take their toys away.
The additional disingenuity he is talking here is that he is talking bolt-action guns, not semi-automatic.
Not saying that bolt-action can’t be used in a mass shooting, but it’s a bit harder when you have to manually cycle the action after each shot, rather than to simply pull the trigger again.
I mean, dipshit is still named after a rifle known predominantly for its association with the colonization of Africa, so I’m not sure much can be done to really avoid such notice. He’s either a gun nut, or a fan of colonization and empire, or—most probably I think—both.
You know, avatars being small and all, I never looked all that closely, and always assumed it was a pile of straw, that being their preferred debate tactic.
I agree with you-I was commenting on his use of the terminology. Another problem is the mindset that the only people qualified to discuss the situation and/or work on laws concerning guns are the pro-gun crowd. Talk about well poisoning.
I mean this is a frankly stupid post. The Pit is a forum with relaxed moderation rules. But the general norms of society still exist. Out in the real world, where there are no moderators, I can act like we’re allowed to act in the Pit 24/7. I don’t. Almost no one does. Why? Because it is rude, annoying, makes you look stupid, and is generally antisocial and dumb. Behavior that falls into those categories, just because it is “allowed” doesn’t exempt the people from engaging in it from being called out for being rude, dumb, histrionic, et cetera. The Pit is a place you can act stupid without losing your posting privileges, it doesn’t immunize your behavior from scrutiny.