Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The AR-15, the Most Wanted Gun in America

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–27 of 27 posts

Re: The AR-15, the Most Wanted Gun in America

#21

Post by DanBC »

taylodl wrote: post #20
rdtsc wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Nope, 100 soldiers entering a town can be decimated by 10-15 people using guerrilla But they wouldn't march into town, they would just shut off the water and power, and then use drones or tanks to pick off the perceived leaders. > Look what happened in Iraq and not that many Iraqis took arms against US /Iraqi government. So amend the amendment then to allow shaped charge IED materials to be legal?

And in so doing they would have lost the hearts and minds of the town's inhabitants, even if they can be temporarily controlled by force. When people from other towns hear of what is happening they'll be better prepared and fight harder. And don't forget every soldier came from Somewhere, USA. They're not going to be happy to see the military turned on their town. They may either stand down or sabotage the effort. Mo…

How did that work out for Waco?

Re: The AR-15, the Most Wanted Gun in America

#22

Post by GiraffeNecktie »

compee wrote: post #19
jmillikin wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The second amendment may have originally been intended to protect the population from the federal government, but subsequent advances in weapons technology and military tactics have rendered that protection completely ineffective. At the same time, these advances make it possible for even a single person to inflict incredible harm on a population, harm far beyond what the writers of the constitution could have imagin…

I honestly don't see any direct correlation with regards to what you are trying to say. Could you elaborate? The only reason to have weapons (in a primitive sense) is for killing animals for food and for certain games related to specific types of weaponry (and wars, but why do we want those?). If some individuals feel the need to own a firearm of any kind to protect themselves (or to protect others from the dangerous…

Except that that's not at all true. http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2013/01/pro-gun-myths-fa...

Re: The AR-15, the Most Wanted Gun in America

#23

Post by rdtsc »

compee wrote: post #17
rdtsc wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Tanks and F16s are a bit too dangerous though :) But doesn't not having them mock and basically nullify the whole idea behind 2nd Amendment? It is doubtful that the writers wanted people be able to protect themselves against thieves, wild bears or to be able to hunt. I think few can argue against that the reason was exactly what the grandparent mentioned. "Arms" in that time's words meant pretty much the same quali…

It would be worth mentioning that to develop nuclear weapons there would be a need to develop them, for something. If we could just step back for a moment and ask the simple question of "Why do we need nuclear weapons?" there is no good reason for anyone to have them.

Nuclear weapons are the key (if not _the_ key) bargaining chip when dealing between governments. There is a distinct and clear difference between the approach taken when dealing with nuclear countries and non-nuclear ones.

So one cannot deny that nuclear weapons are part of the "arms" definition of today. If you wield them and can convince others that you can and will use them (without privately actually intending to use them) you can get all kinds of concessions and a great leverage politically.

For anyone to be able to bully or threaten the US govt. they need to be a credible threat. That's why "arms" were allowed, militia with muskets where pretty darn dangerous back in the day because the government also didn't have anything else except muskets. 1000 displeased citizens were a really huge problem in that day. They wanted the government to never get comfortable, they wanted it to be easily overthrow-able and replaceable if needed.

That's the idea. Without satellites, drones, serious weapons semi automatic assault rifles and pistols are just kids toys and do nothing but let drunk family members shoot each other.

Re: The AR-15, the Most Wanted Gun in America

#24

Post by compee »

GiraffeNecktie wrote: post #22
compee wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I honestly don't see any direct correlation with regards to what you are trying to say. Could you elaborate? The only reason to have weapons (in a primitive sense) is for killing animals for food and for certain games related to specific types of weaponry (and wars, but why do we want those?). If some individuals feel the need to own a firearm of any kind to protect themselves (or to protect others from the dangerous…

Except that that's not at all true. http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2013/01/pro-gun-myths-fa...

Would you mind explicitly stating the flaw in my argument instead of directing me to some website? I can (and often do) read articles of this nature but with a title of "Pro Gun Myths" I'd rather cut out any potential bias and hear your direct argument.

Re: The AR-15, the Most Wanted Gun in America

#25

Post by compee »

rdtsc wrote: post #23
compee wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It would be worth mentioning that to develop nuclear weapons there would be a need to develop them, for something. If we could just step back for a moment and ask the simple question of "Why do we need nuclear weapons?" there is no good reason for anyone to have them.

Nuclear weapons are the key (if not _the_ key) bargaining chip when dealing between governments. There is a distinct and clear difference between the approach taken when dealing with nuclear countries and non-nuclear ones. So one cannot deny that nuclear weapons are part of the "arms" definition of today. If you wield them and can convince others that you can and will use them (without privately actually intending to…

You are stating all of this within the context that the governments should have nuclear weapons. The people (around the world) should have free and open nuclear power. Just because we have nuclear weapons does not mean we should have to use them in negotiations. Sure it helps to have power in any negotiating situation but why do we even get to a point? Isn't that akin to saying "We have power. You don't. Do what we want." This is not how government should be run.

Feel free to message me to continue discussion.

Re: The AR-15, the Most Wanted Gun in America

#26

Post by lutusp »

compee wrote: post #25
rdtsc wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nuclear weapons are the key (if not _the_ key) bargaining chip when dealing between governments. There is a distinct and clear difference between the approach taken when dealing with nuclear countries and non-nuclear ones. So one cannot deny that nuclear weapons are part of the "arms" definition of today. If you wield them and can convince others that you can and will use them (without privately actually intending to…

You are stating all of this within the context that the governments should have nuclear weapons. The people (around the world) should have free and open nuclear power. Just because we have nuclear weapons does not mean we should have to use them in negotiations. Sure it helps to have power in any negotiating situation but why do we even get to a point? Isn't that akin to saying "We have power. You don't. Do what we w…

> Just because we have nuclear weapons does not mean we should have to use them in negotiations.

This contradicts a bedrock diplomatic principle: one must pay attention, not to your opponent's stated intentions, but to his capabilities. Therefore if your opponent has nuclear weapons, it doesn't matter what he says he's going to do, it only matters what he is capable of with everything at his disposal.

Therefore, in negotiations, the existence of nuclear weapons becomes the elephant in the room, regardless of what's actually being discussed.

> Isn't that akin to saying "We have power. You don't. Do what we want." This is not how government should be run.

But that is how governments are run. One must pay attention to reality as well as ideals. Remember that politics is the art of the possible.

Re: The AR-15, the Most Wanted Gun in America

#27

Post by GiraffeNecktie »

compee wrote: post #24
GiraffeNecktie wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except that that's not at all true. http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2013/01/pro-gun-myths-fa...

Would you mind explicitly stating the flaw in my argument instead of directing me to some website? I can (and often do) read articles of this nature but with a title of "Pro Gun Myths" I'd rather cut out any potential bias and hear your direct argument.

You write "it creates good behavior within society through induced paranoia toward people who have a mindset toward committing crimes"

I pointed you to stats which showed that people who carry firearms become more belligerent themselves, more likely to escalate an argument (because they know they can defend themselves) more likely to kill themselves or members of their families etc.

Far from "creating good behavior", firearms do the reverse by encouraging people who are weak, unstable, angry, depressed or confused to act out.

Post reply on HN