Originally published at: https://boingboing.net/2018/03/08/frustrated-ammosexuals.html
Florida students succeed where so many have failed, force state legislature to pass gun control rules despite ferocious NRA lobbying
Originally published at: https://boingboing.net/2018/03/08/frustrated-ammosexuals.html
For some definition of gun control…
Neither the 3-day waiting period on all rifles and shotguns, raising the age from 18 to 21 to buy any firearm, or the bump stock ban will have any effect on crime
This law would hinder someone like the Parkland shooter as long as they are <21. But the effect on crime will be negligible, it’s doing SOMETHING at least, right? Something is better than nothing.
Sarah and Jim Brady are smiling down on Florida kids today.
I am absolutely inclined to believe the words of an NRA lobbyist that the bill they hate will be completely ineffective.
Exactly. It’s not binary. Trying to improve the situation, in this case, move back to the entirely sensible and reasonable position that “A well regulated Militia…” from “because, money.”
And they know we’ll never have the data to prove it has been, while they can continue to spew analogies and anecdotes about how it’s not.
But I’ll take this as a victory. The adults may have their heads so far up the asses of the GOP that they can see daylight coming in their mouths, but these magnificent kids of ours are going to do alright I think. Hope in the future is a lovely thing to have.
Boy, “a mixed bag” is putting it pretty charitably, don’t you think? It doesn’t even include their key demand, and the modest, no-brainer reforms it does include (while perfectly valid) seem relatively insignificant weighed against the overwhelming, horrifying stupidity of the push to put more guns in schools. That’s almost certain to have a net negative effect on school safety, not to mention the criminalization of children and the myriad other implications of educating our kids in an environment where the authority figures are packing heat. It’s a terrifying precedent for any other efforts at reform around the country.
Credit to the students for a valiant effort, but if this is what we get as a result, I really have to hope Scott has the sense to veto it.
OK, fair enough. But walk through each law and imagine if you were a criminal, how would these effect you? Statistically, rifles and shotguns are rarely used in crime (about 15%), thus any law, even a ban on them, would have a negligible reduction (not a full 15%, as obviously people would shift to handguns.)
I concede someone under 21 who doesn’t have access to an illegal network will be hindered. That isn’t who is doing most of the crime. (Note the legal limit for handguns, which are most often used in crime, already had a 21 year old restriction.)
Steps for change are still steps forward. And just because they want allocate money for guns and training for teachers does not mean that the teachers will do that. It’s voluntary, and most teachers think the idea is insane. Maybe there could be a loophole that would let the teachers use that money for something really needed: the kid’s education.
Florida governor Rick Scott says he opposes the legislation because of its provision for arming teachers, but has stopped short of promising to veto it.
Bull fucking shit. He opposes the legislation because his owners told him to. If they told him to dance a merry jig, he would happily comply.
Was the legislation specific as to what to arm the teachers with, and what training to provide?
Because we can arm them with the tools and materials and training to do their jobs properly,
On this and other issues it’s been heartening to see Millenials and younger people pushing aside what once seemed to be immovable Boomer intransigence. As usual, Tim Kreider nails it:
No, see, the important thing is that we #DID SOMETHING.
Never mind whether it’s actually going to combat the issue or the myriad embarrassing failures of the authorities in response to the shooting and the warning signs leading up to it.
As long as we pass a law, that’ll solve things.
It’s literally the least the legislators could do. The thing is, the NRA can’t stand any moves towards gun control. So yeah, it probably won’t do much. On the other hand, it’s a start, and that probably freaks the NRA out more than anything.
Imagine “Any Law” if you were a criminal …
I’ve always thought that the argument that “why have a law when criminals will break the law” is a poor one, because why have any laws then? Only when we can guarantee 100% compliance?
The illegal network of suppliers (as Jim Jefferies likes to point out) is not always that easy if you have mental health issues like the Joker Kid in Colorado or the Sandy Hook aspergers kid, imagine them on the docks trying to buy a gun.
It is a step and a ways to go, you can keep the handguns and hunting guns and the 2nd amendment just make the age 21, mental health, criminal background checks and a waiting period, and quit selling semi-auto military grade weapons - it’s not like you’re going to be hunting deer wearing body armor, (ok big man try to get me).
By that I mean does the law stop you from legally obtaining lethal weapons or causing harm? I conceded that it would hinder <21 people. Other than that small percentage, the answer is no.
The law doesn’t stop or even hinder someone like the Parkland shooter if he was over 21. A 3 day wait isn’t a hindrance if you’re planning a mass shooting. This isn’t about 100% compliance, it in simple terms is not going to deter crime in any significant way. Remember the average crime we see everyday that gets glossed over in the news is what is responsible for most of the homicides in the US.
Now to clarify some of your comments:
Ironically, the .223/5.56 round the AR15 most often uses isn’t approved to hunt deer in some states, for all its “military grade”. Your average .30 caliber deer rifle has all of the same functionality of a “military grade” sniper rifle, other than the barrel is usually tapered to reduce weight. The idea these weapons are some how over powered stems from ignorance.
So is the idea that people don’t hunt with them or that they are not good hunting rifles. First off, the Mini-14 has been a favorite of ranchers and farmers for various pest control for years, and it has the same functionality, though different looks, than the AR. But beyond that, they are used to hunt everything from deer (newer hunting rounds make them adequate with proper shot placement), to hogs, to coyotes, to prairie dogs. No, they aren’t blasted from the hip or used to spray prey. They are used like any other hunting rifle, though they are better for a follow up shot if needed. Actually a semi-auto is preferred when it comes to pest removal like feral hogs because they are usually in a group and there is a better shot of taking more than one before they all scatter. Feral hogs cause millions in crop and farm damage every year.
Usually there is some restriction with how many rounds are carried in the field, but hunting with an AR is just like driving a sports car to work - just because you can drive 100mph, doesn’t mean that is how you actually drive your car on the road that fast.
I hope that clears up some misconceptions.
You don’t need them for hunting despite the herds of feral hogs. My father in law is a retired conservation officer, avid hunter and a total gun enthusiast but would never use one in hunting.
High Capacity magazines, unless it takes 50 rounds to hit that gopher, are also not necessary. Essentially semi-automatics or guns easily convertible to auto with bump stocks etc.
(The old definition argument is also tiresome, "you don’t know the difference between piston and gas impingement therefore you can have no useful opinion on the subject).
Regarding whether laws would work, actually the UK and Australia have shown they have, I don’t know how or why there haven’t been any mass shootings there since.
Forget 3 days, 60 day waiting period as in Germany, and ban private sales.
But sure, those students could have been killed by anything else (insert item here, lawn furniture, vehicles etc).
Neither would my dad. But I am pointed out that they are used in a normal manner.
Again, people typically aren’t using high capacity magazines in the field. Indeed most states have capacity limits in the field. Though they are used in other sports like Practical Rifle and 3 Gun competitions. ETA - rather standard 30rnd mags, not 50.
I haven’t argued definitions were wrong, but some of the misconceptions.
I’ve conceded severe banning and confiscation would probably reduce some crime, but good luck with that.
I am afraid that Australia is not a good example. You can’t take a country that had minimal gun crimes, point to their gun control law followed by a reduction in gun crime at a rate that predated the law (and is a fraction of the decline seen in the US at the same time guns in the US population were increasing) and claim the gun law made the difference.