So you wouldn't give 50p to save a child in Africa from being blinded by an infection, then?hollow wrote:My choice was "vote in support of people I'll never meet" or "vote in support of myself".
Actually, I hate those.hollow wrote:Whether or not you personally agree with magazine limits or bans on mostly aesthetic attachments, ...
2 x 15 in 20.64s, 3 x 10 in 18.05s, 5 x 6 in 21.45s;
2 x 15 in 22.9s, 3 x 10 in 25.51s, 5 x 6 in 26.93s;
1 x 20 in 12.16, 2 x 10 in 10.73s;
1 x 20 in 12.26s, 2 x 10 in 14.63s
What else was there? A barrel shroud aka heat shield? A thing to stop you burning your thumb if you shoot thumb-over-bore. The horror, the horror. A "shoulder thing that goes up?" Yeah, there is such a thing. You can see it on the L86, particularly in this view. It's there to make a rifle more accurate. A ban on a rarely-used add-on that makes rifles more accurate. Pistol grip extending further from bore axis than butt? Seriously? Bunch o' guys with AKs and the issue is whether the pistol grip extends further from the bore axis than the butt? Let me just check that.
Oh no! It does! That's an assault weapon! He's totally going to assault someone with that! Be afraid.
The gang member in front of this, though? It ain't painted black, it only holds 8 rounds (fun fact: it's one rifle you really do load with a clip), it doesn't have a scope on it, it doesn't have a barrel shroud or a shoulder thing that goes up, its pistol grip does not extend as far down as its butt and it is, all-round, totally not a Sniper Assault Weapon (whatever the **** one of those is), so he's got no reason at all to be concerned about having a live 7.62x57mm ball round aimed at his head. If that Spetsnaz team had those, we could all be totally cool about them being there, because those aren't the scary kind that people use to kill other people.
Obviously, sarcasm aside, they don't need to be. The "Washington Sniper" ... frickin' amateur ... didn't need a high-magnification scope or a thermal imager or a laser or a 30-round magazine or a barrel shroud or a thingawhatsit. I could make him look "relatively benign" with a single-shot L81 if I really wanted to get executed for my crimes. Someone who wants to shoot up a school can do it with a bunch of 15-round magazines, a bunch of 10-round magazines, a bunch of 5-round magazines or a satchel full of revolvers. A nutter over here killed 12 and injured 11 with a double-barrel shotgun and a .22 bolt-action rifle.
There have been some mad suggestions that one school shooting could have been prevented if the school had employed armed guards like the ones who didn't stop another school shooting, or if the teachers all carried guns (and had to keep kids' hands away from them all the tiem until the day someone started the spree by shooting the teacher).
A country that has a statistic for the average number of people killed by bullets falling out of the sky every year is a country with a gun problem. 0.17 to 0.25 justifiable out of 3.43 to 4.29 gun homicides per 100,000 people per year is, crudely, 3.18 to 4.12 unjustifiable gun homicides per 100,000 people per year, which adds up to more dead Americans every year than 9/11 and occupying Iraq achieved put together. Since 9/11 there've been that many deaths from "Oh shit that was loaded," and then you've got 20-27 per 100,000 per year non-fatally injured with guns, which is more than your death rate from diabetes mellitus.
All of that means I agree that there are problems there, but in every unjustifiable homicide the problem wasn't the barrel shroud or the magazine size. The problem was that that individual had a gun, so that's where any intervention should be. If you're going to regulate something, regulate who has access to guns and when and where, not what guns (or magazines or accessories) are available.
Maybe actually do something about the bullies before their victims give up on you and defend themselves like that, too, in at least one school's case?