[deleted]
Please don't quote or share this.
New Zealand banning assault and semi-automatic rifles
51–60 of 75 posts
Re: New Zealand banning assault and semi-automatic rifles
#52Earlier quoted context omitted.
> How many bullets do you really need to hunt? In the US, this is the question used to neuter the second amendment. It isn't there to protect us from deer. The 2nd is meant to be used against people. The right that exists is the ability to protect your rights, life, and property, through force if necessary.
Look at it this way: if you're going to lead an illegal insurrection to overthrow what you think is a tyranical government, why do you care what the gun laws are?
A necessary precondition for a tyrannical government is a power imbalance between the people and the government. Allowing citizens to own arms that are in the same league as what the government uses prevents this.
Re: New Zealand banning assault and semi-automatic rifles
#53Earlier quoted context omitted.
When you mention Neimoller's poem, 1984 or Brave New World in an internet comment not related to literary criticism, you automatically lose.
Who made up that silly rule?
Analogies to the Nazis (which Neimoller's poem is, implying a slippery slope to mass graves or something equally terrible) and dystopian fiction have become so tedious and banal at this point that I group them together with Godwin's Law as examples of arguments with negative intellectual value.
If a commenter is resorting to these, it's evidence they have little of value to add to the conversation beyond concern trolling.
> Who made up that silly rule?
I guess I did. But I can't be the only one sick of seeing these low effort memes pop up around here.
Re: New Zealand banning assault and semi-automatic rifles
#54Earlier quoted context omitted.
>Exactly, one can always rely on the general population to illegally stockpile guns and ammunition, just in case. I probably shouldn't reply to an obvious troll account but... yes. That is exactly how revolutions happen throughout the world - with weapons procured through the black market or otherwise illegal means. It's only the US which insists that a right to revolution be legally defined and protected by the very…
Of course, I forgot that stricter gun control will create a thriving market for illegal firearms. I guess everything's fine then!
I mean, snark all you want modest_sarcasm, but facts are facts. The right of revolution doesn't depend on legal access to firearms, and the evidence of that is... literally every revolution since the advent of firearms.
And Americans have started enough such revolutions around the world that they should have figured this out by now.
Re: New Zealand banning assault and semi-automatic rifles
#55Re: New Zealand banning assault and semi-automatic rifles
#56Thank God for the Second Amendment.
I can't tell if that is sarcasm
Re: New Zealand banning assault and semi-automatic rifles
#57I believe that writing legislation for assault rifles is trickier than for semi-autos, because the latter is a more properly defined type. That is, we talk about assault rifles as if they were easily defined but they can be functionally the same as sport rifles but with different grips, and the larger default magazines.
Assault rifle is a defined term, it comes from the German Sturmgewehr, and it has been used since WWII to mean a select fire military issue weapon. As a side note, they’ve been heavily restricted in the US for civilian ownership since 1986, and manufacture for civilian ownership has been banned since 1986. As a result, the supply is very limited and the cost for a civilian legal M16, for instance, hovers around 20 th…
>Assault rifle is a defined term
It is not precise enough, that is my point. You can take an assault rifle and manufacture a sport version that removes military convenience features but is still as deadly. Not so with the auto or semi-auto designation.
They are right to focus on magazine size in legislation. Also ammo type.
Re: New Zealand banning assault and semi-automatic rifles
#58Earlier quoted context omitted.
2nd amendment rights are in direct conflict with the right to be alive.
There's a reason why the second amendment comes right after freedom of speech. If the government doesn't uphold your rights as citizens, the citizens have the authority to hold their ground. Imagine Venezuela, but the citizens having guns. The government couldn't do what they're doing over there if the citizens had guns.
Citizens have guns in the US.
It's also the only "democratic" country where police officers shoot innocent citizens every day.
Go figure.
Re: New Zealand banning assault and semi-automatic rifles
#59Earlier quoted context omitted.
There's a reason why the second amendment comes right after freedom of speech. If the government doesn't uphold your rights as citizens, the citizens have the authority to hold their ground. Imagine Venezuela, but the citizens having guns. The government couldn't do what they're doing over there if the citizens had guns.
Citizens have guns in the US. It's also the only "democratic" country where police officers shoot innocent citizens every day. Go figure.
Citizens have guns in Canada and police officers there don't shoot innocent citizens every day.
Go figure.
Re: New Zealand banning assault and semi-automatic rifles
#60Earlier quoted context omitted.
Who made up that silly rule?
Analogies to the Nazis (which Neimoller's poem is, implying a slippery slope to mass graves or something equally terrible) and dystopian fiction have become so tedious and banal at this point that I group them together with Godwin's Law as examples of arguments with negative intellectual value. If a commenter is resorting to these, it's evidence they have little of value to add to the conversation beyond concern trol…
Godwin's law doesn't say what you think it does.
It's not a "low effort meme", it's appropriate sometimes.