Well, the drug laws have very effectively allowed for secret funding of illegal government spookery, empowered racism in law enforcement, and kept safe drugs out of the hands of those who arguably needed them, so you can’t say they haven’t achieved anyone’s goals.
Similarly the debate over gun access is very effective at keeping urban and rural populations contemptuous of each other, so it’s certainly helping prevent effective coalition building at the grassroots.
The principle is still useful when applied thoughtfully. Of course people will find workarounds if you restrict them too much, so you only restrict them in the areas where it makes sense. I’m reminded of a story where a company was repeatedly being infected with malware, and the source was traced to the HR department. They had to open all of the attachments because, resumes…
The solution was to get 2 incredibly locked down machines and instructing the HR people to only open the resumes on them. They were still allowed to to do whatever else they wanted on their “regular” computers. Restrict the process, not the people. (If I remember correctly the anecdote was from Marcus Ranum, which I’m going to stretch and say doesn’t put me too off topic for a gun thread.)
Should we prune off the “why” into another thread? I thought the whole point of this thread was technical and factual information so as to avoid the long winded legal, political, sociological discussions.
…which works great in the corporate world, where if I don’t like the way my access is restricted by the sysadmin, I can go find another job, or at least do my torrenting and porn surfing at home on my own machine.
I don’t think it works so well in the environment where the sysadmin is the federal government, and it chooses to determine what is the appropriate Least Privilege for you, wherever you happen to be, twenty four hours a day.
I sometimes work on and off of horses, and more frequently four wheelers. I can keep a handgun in my bag or in a shoulder holster, and pretty much forget it is even there. A rifle, especially a scoped one, is awkward to carry, and you have to worry about banging the scope into something. Or rain. I carry a rifle when I can, because I very much enjoy shooting at small objects that are very far away, and it is a challenge to do that under differing conditions.
But I always carry a gun when I go into the mountains, which is most days. I understand that it is very rare that I actually need it. I also carry an MRE pouch in my pack, but I almost never get stuck on an unplanned overnight stay. Better safe than …
Well of course not all of them are. But I am consistently amazed how “right” they get depictions of fire arms in anime like Gunslinger Girl. Even watching Sword Art Online, when one character has a flash back of a criminal with a gun, I looked it up, and it was a Chinese knock off of a Tokarev. And if you are going to find a gun being used by a criminal in Japan, odds are it is a Chinese Tokarev.
The thing to understand is that these shows have a very limited audience who actually cares about these details than the actual storyline. Please dont take these shows as being representative of general Japanese cartoon/TV viewers at all.
Its exactly this sort of hyper focus on certain types of details that is the defining characteristic of Otaku. Note also that word still has very nasty connotation here. It was never otherwise unlike how the loan word version got used in American English.
All I am saying is I see the care to get details right more in Japanese media than in American media. An American comic book is more likely to have a cludged together weapon that looks realish, but not a real gun. (Though something like the Punisher would be more likely to pay attention to such details. Indeed Tim Bradstreets covers are very realistic.)
Anime and Manga often get every screw head in the right place. Even many of their fictional guns are realistic enough I would think someone could make a working replica, like in Hellsing. So someone at least cares about getting the little details correct, because the time and cost in doing so has to be more than not caring.