I don’t know, I didn’t write the article. The fact is that makers are funneling money to politicians, and that is thr only point I wanted to make.
There are a great many more factors involved in what makes a mass shooter than media coverage, and I think you know that.
1 Like
The point is such ranges and gunfire on one’s property is generally of enough distance from concentrations of people that it is not considered a safety hazard or an actual nuisance. No need for silenced weapons in such contexts.
They do not serve a legitimate non-criminal, non-military, non-police use is a good enough reason as any.
The bad journalism and misrepresentation of silencers goes beyond this one article. Seems to be standard acting procedure, honestly if silencers continue to be regulated as they’ve always been i would be fine with it. If they ease the restrictions on them i would be fine with it too. Silencers do not make firearms any more dangerous, if the plan is to reduce gun violence this is probably the worst place to focus on.
1 Like
I’m not calling you out here. I’m going on a tangent based on what the article says.
Moreover it is not the intended purpose of the 2nd Amendment. It was meant to create unofficial paramilitaries specifically IN SUPPORT of the government. Not as a bulwark against it. Unfortunately the best example of this in practice is the “Death Squads” so ubiquitous to dictatorships.
2 Likes
Are we not allowed to rail against a guilty party who’s not usually taken to task, without calling out all the other guilty parties?
What do you think I was trying to accomplish?
When do we get to talk about reducing gun violence? We can’t talk about after shootings, or when laws are being loosened around guns ownership or gun related accesories, please let me know when.
1 Like
A non-existent mental health care system and easy access to firearms with high capacity magazines.
3 Likes
I honestly, didn’t know. Apologies.
Blame to go around, I said. But you missed quoting that part. I was calling out the hypocrisy of the article.
2 Likes
I didn’t see the date on the article. Yeah, it’s in really poor taste.
1 Like
It isn’t the problem, but a problem. Maybe it had no influence on this shooter, but how many copycat shooters take place because of the general mindshare?
1 Like
I don’t disagree, but I thought the Salon article was a modern article and not in response to Newtown. You are correct, media coverage immediately after a mass shooting that promotes the name of the murderer encourages it to be repeated.
That’s why I deleted my comment. Because while the media surrounding the Alex Jones’ of the world is more responsible in that case, the over-saturation of new coverage immediately following the act is a huge problem and that article is an example.
2 Likes
Any time is appropriate to talk about reducing gun violence, it’s definitely a big issue. I am also of the mind that regulations for gun ownership do not need to be loosened but increased. I have a problem with the idea that silencers can turn any gun into a more effective killing tool, i don’t buy that. Should the regulations around them need to be loosened too considering the crisis we’re dealing with as a nation? Probably not, but i’m just giving my view that they aren’t as dangerous as they’re being portrayed.
As I said, I would rather my neighbor* used a silencer, since we can hear each other talking in normal voices when we are on our respective back porches, and that’s where he likes to shoot from. There’s a creek between us that’s quite a good sound reflector.
But really the whole argument is pragmatically meaningless. It’s increasingly impossible to actually limit access to guns and silencers, even in the modern US police state. I can get access to a 6000 psi waterjet cutter for $200 a month, and I could already build a functional silenced gun from grocery store parts for less than that.
* actually former neighbor at this point. New folks moved in last month, the old neighbor moved back to NYC I believe.
That entire phrase is laughable. We can’t even develop decent gun ownership resources for law enforcement or insurance purposes right now out of nonsense fears of “big brother” taking away guns. Much like how the VIN number system, mandatory insurance and access to state registration information by law enforcement has made it easy for the government to confiscate cars.
1 Like
The phrase wasn’t laughable to me when I was trying to shut down an illegal dump being run by a Wilmington police officer and heavily armed cops from multiple jurisdictions showed up at 2AM at my house.
It’s also not laughable to the many people who have had family members murdered by police.
If you’re flying the thin blue line flag you can just piss right off.
The fact that you are still around to post online shows even corrupt constables have their limits.
So I guess its safe to say you were a supporter of movements against unlawful murders by police like…
1 Like
True in my particular case. I’m still around because I glimpsed uniforms through the window before they saw me with a weapon in my hand. I chucked that knife about twenty feet instantly, two rooms away from me, and thus I survived to see my kids graduate high school.
Sorry if I jumped salty there, it’s a sore point with me when people try to deny that the police in the USA are dangerously out of control. It’s getting worse every day, and yet I’m seeing more police apologism every day, particularly those stupid flags.
The goals and motivations of BLM are agreeable to me, but I often disagree with their strategy and rhetoric. I am more of an MLK follower, so I’m a fellow traveler with BLM, rather than a member of the movement.
1 Like
