>> |
No. 377489
>>377473
That's actually pretty much it, Ram. Hardcore "pro-lifers" want abortion banned in all cases because in their minds, terminating a pregnancy is morally indistinguishable from premeditated murder, so in their minds they're obligated to get it completely outlawed. Until then, they restrict access However they can: waiting periods, spousal vetoes, parental notification, requiring clinic hallways be x feet wide, mandatory trasnvaginal ultrasounds, etc. if you're convinced you may be saving a life, you can justify it, regardless of the invasions of privacy and suffering you create.
Likewise, if you accept it as axiomatic that civilians don't have the right or need for guns, and that their ownership of guns inevitably leads to deaths, you can justify any end-run around the 2nd Amendment/district of Columbia v. Heller/McDonald v Chicago, regardless of the burden it imposes on law abiding gun owners, its broader civil rights implications, or its actual effect on violent crime.
We need gun regulation, we do. theyre dangerous tools, and we need to hold owners responsilbe for their negligent use and storage and prevent those likely to use them negligently or intentionally to harm others (children, the mentally ill, convicted felons) from owning them. but our regulations need to make sense. Does a pistol grip make a rifle more accurate, or the bullet it fires more damaging? Of course not, but combine removable magazine with pistol grip and woops! Now that hunting rifle is an evil assault rifle. Does a gun become more likely to be used in a crime if it holds 11 rounds rather than 10 or seven? Of course not, but arbitrary magazine limits abound. Why are post-86 automatic weapons banned for civilians but not pre-86 ones? No reason! Its not that we've decided that full-auto is too dangerous for civilians, its just that congressman hughes tacked it on to the Firearm Owners Protection Act of 1986 and we've been stuck with a dwindling, aging, and increasingly stock of civilian automatics ever since. are open bolt semi-autos fully autpmatic? of course not, they fire one bullet per trigger pull, but the ATF has decided that open-bolt = full auto, so they are, legally! Why are short-barreled rifles NFA items even though pistols, which are smaller, easier to conceal, and can come in rifle calibers, and regular length rifles, which are more powerful and accurate, are not? Because a bunch of idiots back in the prohibition era thought they were gangster weapons! Likewise, silencers are non-transferrae (or repairable!) NFA items and are banned in many states, whip in Europe they practically force you to buy a suppressor for your gun (because hearing protection, noise pollution laws, mostly indoor ranges, and dense population). And why are drivers licenses, marriages (minus gay ones), and all contracts and debts binding across state lines, but ccw permits may or may not be honored? No good reason.
In any state in the union, you can safely assume full freedom of religion, speech, assembly, and travel. but state by state, and even county by county, your right to keep and bear arms varies wildly; in CA, there are counties where anyone can get a ccw, and some where theyre completely unaivalable, and its all at the unreviewed discretion of the sheriff. We need laws on guns, but they need to make sense, have uniformity, and should be able to stand up to strict scrutiny, like other restrictions imposed on the rights in the bill of rights. But, like most political issues in the country, discussion is impossible, facts are irrelevant.
|