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

Women are nearly half of new gun buyers, study finds

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

981–990 of 1001 posts

Re: Women are nearly half of new gun buyers, study finds

#981

Post by mbrodersen »

nverno wrote: post #523
Jedd wrote: post #499

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> PS: I am strong supporter of Gun rights and proud gun owner. I don't understand the pride bit. It seems like a regrettable situation where your distrust of your fellow citizens is so strong that you are comforted by the ability to kill them with minimal effort. (I'm in Australia, where we have some truly horrendous legislation, but I totally agree with our gun ownership laws here, and echo other people's observatio…

> It seems like a regrettable situation where your distrust of your fellow citizens is so strong that you are comforted by the ability to kill them with minimal effort. It's usually the opposite sentiment for gun owners- I trust my fellow citizens with arms. Guns are seen as an integral part of self-reliance by many. They provide you with a reasonably effective defense. One way to significantly erode individual's/cit…

Honest question: would you trust your fellow citizens to have access to nuclear weapons as well?

Re: Women are nearly half of new gun buyers, study finds

#982

Post by mbrodersen »

evilos wrote: post #751
onemiketwelve wrote: post #730

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let me start off by saying I love playing with guns, and really frankly anything gun related. I don't know why it is but I've just been fascinated with them since I was a kid. Ok that said, I don't understand how guns protect us from the government. I think the biggest threats area slow and mundane. Ie erosion of rights or increasing power of some portion of the government over decades. There's no one cataclysmic eve…

IMO citizens being well armed is deterrence. It makes the likelihood of 'evil martial law' government less likely by increasing the perceived cost. If you truly disarmed the entire country (something I consider basically impossible), it makes a military coup/governance much more feasible. One of the main lessons of modern history is that insurgencies are incredibly cost effective ways to fight a stronger opponent. Yo…

The moment anybody tried to organise armed resistance to the government, they would instantly be declared “terrorists” and taken out by legal means or by force. The US government agencies have such information supremacy that it is nearly impossible for any armed groups to organise without the government knowing about it.

Re: Women are nearly half of new gun buyers, study finds

#983

Post by mbrodersen »

ctdonath wrote: post #758
onemiketwelve wrote: post #730

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let me start off by saying I love playing with guns, and really frankly anything gun related. I don't know why it is but I've just been fascinated with them since I was a kid. Ok that said, I don't understand how guns protect us from the government. I think the biggest threats area slow and mundane. Ie erosion of rights or increasing power of some portion of the government over decades. There's no one cataclysmic eve…

The biggest threats are slow and mundane because the population is heavily armed. Anything fast and oppressive (ex.: Australia's Covid lockdown) would be seriously opposed. The "Waco" incident was a fast and oppressive move (violent SWAT-type raid on a group for a small paperwork/tax violation), those targeted fought back, gov't didn't do it again for decades. Government isn't going to attack lots of individuals via…

The majority of Australians agree with the “oppressive” COVID lockdowns. Especially given how badly the US is handling it.

Re: Women are nearly half of new gun buyers, study finds

#984

Post by proc0 »

glangdale wrote: post #687
greenie_beans wrote: post #160

i live in the american south, where everybody owns guns. i own a gun for hunting. but for self defense, i have pepper spray and bear spray instead of guns because i don't want to kill somebody regardless of their intentions. i'd be curious to see the stats of self-defense/firearms, because it seems like self-defense gun owners are LARPing over imagined intruder situations. they're definitely not about to take up arms…

The thing I always find astonishing about the LARPing element of "taking up arms against the state" is how one-sidedly political it is. An authoritarian right-wing state - say, an alternate world where Trump had somehow seized power and suspended democracy - would find large numbers of American gun owners who would be very happy about this and serve as a pro-government paramilitary (coordinating the police/military a…

> lack of historical awareness to imagine that gun ownership in private hands will be default mobilized "against tyranny"

Why is it so hard to believe? You really think the military would drop bombs on cities and destroy infrastructure just to control the populace?

The nature of tyranny is about instilling fear in the populace in order to control them. If you destroy your own cities it defeats the purpose of being in power as a dictator.

The end goal is CONTROL, and you cannot control an armed populace. There aren't enough police and military to take on a city where a good portion of the people are armed. There are millions upon millions of armed civilians, and even the military wouldn't stand a chance. Not to mention that in history, taking guns away is exactly what dictatorships have done.

Re: Women are nearly half of new gun buyers, study finds

#985

Post by xmprt »

nostromo wrote: post #616
xmprt wrote: post #270

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The US government probably seems less corrupt than the EU because of its laid back approach to a lot of policies. However, that's exactly the type of corruption that a lot of people are talking about. The country needs a lot of change to tackle big problems like climate change and increasing wealth inequality however the government is sitting back doing nothing because many representatives are lobbied by big interest…

Why blame lobbyists for this? You can see for yourself what actual Americans think the "most important problem" they're facing is: https://news.gallup.com/poll/1675/Most-Important-Problem.asp... Global warming and income inequality are so low they barely register in the poll at all. Representatives follow their constituents.

Over the last few years it's become increasingly clear that many people don't think for themselves and will believe in whatever their favorite media tells them. A lot can be done to convince the population that climate change and income inequality aren't major issues.

Also, that poll seems flawed because it asks a superlative question (what is the "most" important problem) instead of using something like ranked choice where perhaps climate change and income inequality were everyone's second and third options.

Re: Women are nearly half of new gun buyers, study finds

#986

Post by glangdale »

proc0 wrote: post #984
glangdale wrote: post #687

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The thing I always find astonishing about the LARPing element of "taking up arms against the state" is how one-sidedly political it is. An authoritarian right-wing state - say, an alternate world where Trump had somehow seized power and suspended democracy - would find large numbers of American gun owners who would be very happy about this and serve as a pro-government paramilitary (coordinating the police/military a…

> lack of historical awareness to imagine that gun ownership in private hands will be default mobilized "against tyranny" Why is it so hard to believe? You really think the military would drop bombs on cities and destroy infrastructure just to control the populace? The nature of tyranny is about instilling fear in the populace in order to control them. If you destroy your own cities it defeats the purpose of being in…

It's remarkable how little you engaged with what I actually wrote, in your haste to deploy the usual LARPing tropes about freedom fighters and "armed civilians" and such nonsense.

Once again, for the slow kids with reading comprehension problems:

Armed civilians are not a reliable source of resistance against certain types of tyranny - notably right-wing authoritarian tyranny. They are, in fact, more likely to crop up in pro-government paramilitaries who are willing to do the dirty work that a tyranny doesn't want to get around to.

In short, for every gun in the hands of a genuine libertarian, there are 2-3 guns in the hands of hard right authoritarians whose embrace of 'libertarianism' only extends as far as "government letting people exactly like me do whatever they want".

Re: Women are nearly half of new gun buyers, study finds

#987

Post by glangdale »

glangdale wrote: post #705
teakettle42 wrote: post #423

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You live somewhere with strict gun laws, and in your own words, serious and obvious crime problems. You think the people living in much safer places have a viewpoint that’s “silly to the point of absurdity”. Yet, they’re the ones living somewhere with much lower crime and murder rates. How is this an argument for the efficacy of your preferred policies?

I always enjoy watching Americans accuse other Americans of living in places "with strict gun laws", as if nearly all of the US isn't a moderate drive away from a place with lax gun laws. It's also fairly absurd to refer to places with few gun laws as "much safer". The only way of making that trick work is to compare big cities in areas with stronger gun control with rural areas and small towns elsewhere. The worst U…

I should note, in the interest of fairness, that about half of the top 10 cities in the USA by homicide rate are in states that could be described as "gun control states". Thus "no pattern". Although, I will reiterate the idea that any city in the continental USA is really not that long a drive away from a state with lax gun laws.

Re: Women are nearly half of new gun buyers, study finds

#988

Post by bradstewart »

Bhilai wrote: post #279

A friend of our family recently bought a gun and that made me ask them why. Their response was of course personal safety at which point I asked them some more questions and turns out they keep the gun in a gun safe and bullets in another location so as to not cause any accidents as they have kids. But this practice seemed utterly useless if their home was being actively being robbed/attacked since they wont have the…

I do the same thing, although ammunition only moved to a separate safe when we had kids.

For one thing, burglars are typically not going to hit your house like a Navy SEAL team--they are slow, and there is plenty of time to respond.

Second, the ~90 seconds it takes me to get into both safes and load the firearm is enough time to take a few deep breaths and understand what's happening before drawing a weapon.

Third, it's there in the event of natural disasters, etc where police may not be able to respond. Same reason I keep emergency water and food. I've lived through enough hurricanes to know things can escalate quickly, especially when you're running a loud generator.

Re: Women are nearly half of new gun buyers, study finds

#989

Post by orestarod »

proc0 wrote: post #984
glangdale wrote: post #687

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The thing I always find astonishing about the LARPing element of "taking up arms against the state" is how one-sidedly political it is. An authoritarian right-wing state - say, an alternate world where Trump had somehow seized power and suspended democracy - would find large numbers of American gun owners who would be very happy about this and serve as a pro-government paramilitary (coordinating the police/military a…

> lack of historical awareness to imagine that gun ownership in private hands will be default mobilized "against tyranny" Why is it so hard to believe? You really think the military would drop bombs on cities and destroy infrastructure just to control the populace? The nature of tyranny is about instilling fear in the populace in order to control them. If you destroy your own cities it defeats the purpose of being in…

I'd be interested to know how you concludes the military would have no luck against armed civilians.

Re: Women are nearly half of new gun buyers, study finds

#990

Post by ashtonkem »

solidsnack9000 wrote: post #871
_carbyau_ wrote: post #832

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thank you for the detailed response. I guess my dreamed up scenarios were more vague "shooter/assailant in the area" whereby I figured I'd want to "make myself less desirable to bother with". Hence small caliber, lots of noise/attempts and if - god forbid - anything connected it would still hurt/slow them. I never really contemplated a "someone intent on killing you" scenario. It isn't something I think of much and I…

It has been technologically updated -- they do improve the tolerances and consistency, introduce wear reducing coatings, and stuff like that -- but it is fundamentally a small, light bullet in a tiny case. That's what defines it, so there's just not much more power you can get out of it.

Also, rimfire is pretty close to a dead end technology. 17hmr is probably the last mainstream rimfire caliber we’ll see in our lifetime.
Post reply on HN