Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by AtlasBarfed 1745 days ago
At the time of writing, "Arms" was muskets.

So you've already stated that it isn't reasonable to allow the other "arms". So why is anything more than a single shot barrel-loaded rifle allowed?

Of course the reason is that there is a massive industry in making guns and a rabid source of people that can be scared into buying their wares. The reason the laws are the way they are is because of the economics of the lobby and not any principle.

3 comments

What about e.g. https://wryheat.wordpress.com/2018/03/14/multi-shot-assault-... ?

It's unreasonable to restrict ownership of arms unless you want to restrict violence to the government and organized criminals, which the founders most certainly did not intend.

Police killed more Americans in 2019 than mass shooters, how can you make an argument in favor of the cops and courts controlling weaponry? Did you miss the police brutality protests last summer?

I'm not a citizen of the US so I don't really have a horse in this race (about "gun rights") but I am curious about your comment. I don't understand how the right to bear arms has kept police from killing any Americans in 2019 and how it will keep them from killing more in 2021. Can you explain?

I also don't understand how citizens of the US are meant to protect themselves against police with the weapons they're free to carry. Is the idea that US citizens are going to use their weapons to resist the police from arresting them? Isn't that just going to cause no end of bloodshed?

If you look at police shootings, the bulk are police killing people brandishing guns or other weapons, who express intent to or are in the process of using those weapons on either the police or other people.

The vast majority of these incidents happen to hardened criminals that almost no one in their right mind would support. A small fraction of these incidents involve innocent people, or people involved in situations where violence is not the answer and de-escalation would have been a better outcome.

The police have a large amount of support because the people involved in these incidents are, generally speaking, bad people that the majority would prefer to be in prison. Most people don't think the police are an oppressive force that should be fought against with lethal violence.

The right is codified law. It is not up to citizens to argue this. It is up to to those who need to control others to make these arguments. Yours are hncompelling, and have been swatted away by courts for decades.
The guns that Lewis and Clark used on their expedition were decidedly quite fast firing. Yes, it was short after the 2nd Amendment and certainly in the founders' sites of possible.