7
ComicList: New Comic Book Releases List for 09/11/2024
(gocollect.com)
Physics might. No one else could.
Pre-1968, civilians could buy full auto machineguns. At one point in the 1930s the Sears catalog would send a full auto Tommy Gun straight to your house via mail order with no background check.
Slight correction, between '30-'68 you could still get full auto thompsons mailed to you at 12yo (if you had the dough, of course). The GCA of 1968 is what gave us the background checks, and they became instant in the 90s thanks to the internet. Full auto wasn't banned (yes yes I know "technically it isn't banned.." yeah it basically is) until 1986.
And high profile murders did happen but it was mostly stuff like the Valentines Day Massacre, the SLA killing the first black superintendent, Kennedy, Lennon, y'know, not school shootings.
That said I agree with your assessment.
Usually don't do the comment history thing but I was specifically curious about said state, which appears to possibly be Ohio?
Tbf they actually view the other side as the tyrannical one and think their side is the savior, it isn't actually that hard to understand their feelings on that one.
Not saying that they're right, just that this is the explanation for this oft cited "disconnect." Basically just "nobody thinks they're the bad guy."
You could, for example, make it illegal to sell/own guns under 30.
When do people become adults? I think if we're doing shit like this we also have to raise the age of adulthood to (in this case 30). Meaning no military until 30, no smoking/vaping/drinking until 30, on your parent's insurance, they can't kick you out until then, can't be tried as an adult, age of consent, etc, and frankly we likely shouldn't trust kids with other deadly instruments such as cars until then either, they're clearly causing problems with those too considering the numbers on car accidents.
Frankly there is some scientific basis for all this, being that our brains don't stop developing until 25, but this half-adult stage where all of the negatives but none of the benefits apply is ridiculous to me. Fwiw I have this exact same argument about raising the smoking age, etc, it's not just guns, but talk of raising the age makes them relevant to that opinion for me. I'm not even necesarily against it, but for me personally to be on board it has to be bigger than "no guns til 30 just because." Besides, people 18-29, especially women, have a very good reason to have tools with which to defend themselves, and I personally think it'd be a shame to deny say a woman who is escaping an abusive ex those tools, especially considering often women date slightly older men meaning he may be able to get them while she can't, if she's 25ish and he's 30+.
You could ban magazines
Not really. You could ban detachable magazines, which is 99% of guns made after 1910, but that won't fly here because duh, you could ban detachable magazines over 10rnds, but that is entirely ineffective as it's defeated by "carrying another magazine or two," and reloading takes less than 2sec literally (way less if you train it which you can do in your room while watching TV.) That also includes almost every 9mm pistol in the country btw, which mostly have 14-17rnds standard, magazines aren't only in AKs and ARs.
You could limit the caliber of bullets sold.
I mean, in theory maybe that is legally possible? Maybe? But even still the venn diagram of "the deadliest calibre" and "the smallest calibre" is actually just a circle containing the word ".22lr" This is mostly due to quantity (availability/price), of course, but at any rate it illustrates that limiting calibre wouldn't do much since even the smallest calibre commonly available can kill with ease. On top of that the .223 rnd commonly used by mass shooters for example is .003" bigger in diameter than a .22lr, about 25gr heavier of a bullet, but with more powder making it carry about as much kinetic energy as a hot .357 rnd, they don't usw "high powered" rounds like the .50bmg or .338 lapua already, .223 is one of the weakest rifle rounds commonly used for self defense or hunting coyotes.
You could make gun manufacturers civilly liable for the advertisements they put out.
Where are you guys seeing gun ads, like, in Guns & Ammo magazine or something? I don't think I've ever seen one but I hear about them with the whole Daniel Defense scandal. At any rate, they already would be to a degree, like Juul was, that would apply to guns too if it is proven to target kids or something. But there would be a court case to determine culpability which they could win, that's just the way our system works really. Seems easy enough to just not buy those magazines for your kids or whatever. Do they even still have print magazines?
I'm not opposed to something that would actually work and couldn't be abused by some racist sheriff or governor to deny guns to POC et al. But most of the proposed legislation I've seen falls short of one or both of those (personal) requirements. Most things will be used to further burden marginalized populations in overpoliced neighborhoods just like drug prohibition is, it won't affect the people in gated communities at all.
Tbf, they have before. Ron Paul for instance was a Libertarian who ran as a Republican and won, and they do run for local offices a lot (at least the Libertarians, never seen a local Green on the ballot), they just also put forth a presidential candidate because if they can get like 5% or 15% of the vote (I can't remember which) they get federal funding and have to get included in the next debates instead of the debates only being R vs D.
Idk about the other third parties, but the Libertarians are doing exactly that.
His name is Bingo Gas Station Motel Cheeseburger With A Side of Aircraft Noise And You'll Be Gary, Indiana.
Nah it's all a scam, it costs about $130,000 to become clear, and then another $30,000 ish to become level "OTIII," Then another $130,000 to become OTVIII which is the highest current level, just to learn that South Park's Scientology episode was actually accurate to what these people actually believe.
I'd argue that it wouldn't even be doxxing to show it, personally. They put out the flier with their number on it, how is me posting a picture online any different from posting the flyer for a local pizza place with the number visible? Seems to me if it's on the flier it's now public info.
Scientoligists are anti therapy and anti psychology
All cults are, really, because the therapist can see that the cult is basically an abusive partner x1000 and try to decondition the members.
"Plus, that money should be going to the church, or in this case your therapy sessions with us so you can become 'clear.' Don't you want to give us $300,000 so we can tell you your soul is an alien and Xenu is trying to eat it or enslave it or something?"
view more: next ›
ArcaneSlime
joined 1 year ago
Honestly that is every rifle ever made, 20yd is 60ft, the max effective range of the AR with 5.56 is about 600m or 1968.5ft. The AR and its common caliber are far from the best rifle at distance, 6mmARC for example you can push out to 1,000yd. Iirc the longest sniper kill so far on record was 1mi with .338 lapua. 60ft is honestly pistol distances, at this point you'd have to basically ban all rifles. Even .22lr can go 200yd accurately out of a rifle.