United States to fund gun-violence research after 20-year freeze

Re:United States to fund gun-violence research after 20-year... by rayiner on Tuesday December 17, 2019 @10:11AM (#21814201)

> This is the Nelson Muntz of firearms regulations argument. The original AWB proposals were sane and straightforward: they intended to regulate any semi-automatic long gun with a detachable magazine. It was the 2A crowd, and particularly the NRA, that fought off gun control advocates to the absurd position they occupy now.

This is a fair point. I think people underestimate the degree to which 2A advocates are playing from a position of strength. People here in Maryland probably don’t know that semi-automatic rifles remain completely legal notwithstanding the 2013 “ban.”

That raises the question though: presumably, gun control advocates were maneuvered onto this hard-to-defend ground be for reasons. Presumably, nobody could gin up enough support to take away semi-automatic hunting rifles from Minnesota Democrats.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:United States to fund gun-violence research after 20-year... by tptacek on Tuesday December 17, 2019 @11:19AM (#21815058)

I think a federal ban on semi-automatic rifles is a ridiculous, overreaching, and counterproductive goal. Hunters in Minnesota already require licenses; should Minnesota choose, those licenses should suffice to ensure access to semi-automatic rifles. I don't care what color those rifles are, but Minnesota might care about their magazine sizes. Montana might opt out of firearms regulation entirely; that also seems like a perfectly cromulent experiment to run in the laboratories of democracy.

[ Parent | on HN ]