Sinfest

[Sam]

hey i heard someone was trying to start a fight here

[Mindslicer]

[Canopus]

I'm a little, but not too perplexed, by how the militarism in Finland rubbed off onto Sweden. Rubbed.

[Michael]

hunting?

[Monkey Mcdermott]

[Death Ray]

[CTrees]

Okay, serious question. Feinstein's proposed gun ban would exempt government officials (such as herself, actually). Why? I can't seem to come up with a justification for that. I mean, what reason is there for a legislator to be able to own an AR-15 that wouldn't apply at least as well to me?

Also, retired police are exempted, but retired military aren't. That certainly can't be justified by superior training, so... why? Again, serious question, because I really don't understand.

Edit: just to be clear, I'm not asking to be convinced. There are a lot of political arguments for which I can understand the inherent logic, even if I don't agree (see: extreme copyright extensions-I understand the justifications used, but I reject them based on other points). For this, I just can't even see the reasoning behind it, and that bothers me.
_________________
“Yields falsehood when preceded by its quotation”
yields falsehood when preceded by its quotation.

[Michael]

I could see that working politically to relieve some opposition from powerful groups. Then after a while, when the law is no longer questioned, someone could point out these issues and fix them...

[fritterdonut]

[CTrees]

I wasn't even going to address the list, because it's fucked. The mini-14 tactical is banned by name, but all other variants (regular, mini-6.8, mini-30) are allowed (they don't meet the "banned by features" requirements in stock configuration), despite being the exact same weapon-the mini-30 is even a *much* more powerful variation. The Beretta Cx4 Storm does not meet the "banned features" requirements, but is banned by name anyway - the actual weapon? It's literally just a long-barrel 92F with a stock, something no one is saying we should ban (it even has the same magazines as the pistol, and yes, there are 10rd ones available because of California). It's even still chambered for pistol cartridges. The SPAS-12 is listed despite not being imported or even *manufactured* for over a decade (and thus absolutely being grandfathered and exempt from the bill).

I've only spent a lot of time looking throught the banned list, but I've heard much of the "exempt despite having too many scary bits" list is equally inane, populated largely by things included so as to not piss off hunters.

And.. that's me controlling the rant, which is why I was limiting my question to only the government officials and retired police exemptions.
_________________
“Yields falsehood when preceded by its quotation”
yields falsehood when preceded by its quotation.

[fritterdonut]

You know, it amazes me that people ban "x" gun for being dangerous, when gun "y" uses the same ammo, has the same firing speed, and is the same size.

Most of the shotguns on this page:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semi-automatic_shotgun

Are just as dangerous as the Spas-12, and guess what? Some are even made better than the Spas-12, because the Spas wasn't exactly the worlds highest quality. The Benelli 11-87, for example, is much, much nicer. Or even the High-Standard 10.

Bottom line: If it shoots the same ammo, at the same speed, with the same size of firearm, it may as well be the same damn gun.
_________________
Ask not what you can do for your country, ask what your country did to you

[Mindslicer]

[Mikewee777]

^^^ Bumping to 666.

Transport Ahead.
Finance can't stop it.
Laws and deities can't stop it.
Advancements in technology proceed to push ahead.
Chronological barriers caused by tradition can't stop it.

[Mikewee777]

[Mikewee777]

[quote="Mikewee777"]