[ceejayoz]

> Because words have meaning, and ‘handgun’ can mean anything from a muzzle loading musket to a literal MAC-10 that can fire 1800 rounds per minute.

Yes, that's what this thread's about. You argued Gatling guns being legal makes gun control overall silly; someone else noted that the theoetical regulatory gap exists because in practice no one uses Gatling guns in crimes.

> And if you can’t understand or articulate what is going on, then good luck doing anything about it?

I think 25x the gun homicide rate effectively articulates what's going on. Do you disagree?

[lazide]

And for any given thing that meets the criteria for ‘handgun’, what percentage do you think has ever been used in any significant number of crimes or accidents? I’m guessing way less than 1%.

Either by make/model, or by individual items. Statistically, by item, it’s likely .001% territory.

So again, care to make your screaming more coherent? Right now you seem to be doing the equivalent of screaming about ‘cars kill people’. When, okay, there are a lot of car accidents. Plenty of people murdering each other with cars too!

But how does that add anything to the conversation?

and I gave an example of a historically high power piece of military equipment that would still strike fear in anyone on the other side of it - that is also completely legal to own in even a high ‘ban’ state like California - and apparently also not ‘causing a lot of crime’. there are new manufacture ones out there. they are pretty cool! [https://tippmannordnance.com/gatling-guns/].

so what is the actual deal, eh?