• VikingHippie@lemmy.wtf
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      30
      ·
      1 year ago

      Judging by her educational history and political present day, I’m guessing she’s not fond of being lectured or otherwise informed by anyone about anything.

    • quaddo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      19
      ·
      1 year ago

      They could call it a “fnorplgleek” for all I care.

      Until they figure out how to prevent any and all fnorplgleeks from having the ability to injure, main, or kill another human being when the fnorplgleek operator wishes to harm you unlawfully, they can expend 100% of their thinkbox time figuring out how to do so. Like, pin their wetware CPU to working out a solution. Interconnect them Borg style.

      If the response is “well no, not like that” then we recognize that it’s a compromise that continues to put victims in front of said fnorplgleek operators.

      brb getting a “Down with fnorplgleeks” t-shirt made

      • SpezBroughtMeHere@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        So you wouldn’t care if the legislation was written to ban anything that has the potential to kill?

        Guns, cars, knives, bleach, rope all could fall into that category. See how words have specific definitions and actually matter quite a bit? Especially when the law is concerned. Why do you think there’s different categories of homicide? Do you think manslaughter and 1st degree murder should carry the same penalty?

          • SupraMario@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            So large jacked up trucks have a use? Butterfly knives and swords have practical uses? What about cars with more than 200 hp? Not like you can do 120mph anywhere legally, so why have them? Or alcohol, more people are killed 10 fold via drunk drivers than all rifles combined… sounds like alcohol should go back to prohibition era and the gov. poisons it.

    • Sunfoil@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      1 year ago

      I would be concerned for your knowledge of gun safety if you didn’t know this too. She’s a lunatic, but she has a point.

      • enki@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        27
        ·
        1 year ago

        This is just bullshit GOP deflection whenever someone calls it what it is.The AR in AR-15 may stand for Armalite, but an AR-15 is still an assault rifle.

        The U.S. Army defines assault rifles as "short, compact, selective-fire weapons that fire a cartridge intermediate in power between submachine gun and rifle cartridges.

        And

        …examples of intermediate cartridges are the 7.92×33mm Kurz, the 7.62×39mm and 5.56×45mm NATO.

            • aidan@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              6
              ·
              1 year ago

              Um… You know I can easily buy a single-fire gun.

              It is very challenging for me to buy a selective fire gun. Because, they have been heavily regulated for a long time.

            • RaoulDook@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              5
              ·
              1 year ago

              You know you just can’t call “bullshit deflection” every time you are wrong because you failed to understand what you read right?

          • enki@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            You could argue that, but I could also argue that the majority of M16/AR-15 style rifles issued by the US military are semi-automatic just like civilian models. Why? Because semi-automatic fire is, by far, more accurate, efficient, and deadly than burst or automatic fire.

            So whether you want to call it an assault rifle, a long rifle, or whatever, the one you buy at Bass Pro Shops is just as advanced and deadly as what our military carries. So asking for some common sense gun laws and improved mental healthcare before you can just walk into a store and walk out with what is functionally the exact same rifle the most powerful military in the world issues to its soldiers maybe isn’t too fucking much to ask. The number one cause of death for children in the US is fucking firearms. As a lifelong gun owner, stop pissing and moaning about how improved gun laws will ruin your hobby while fucking kindergartners are far more likely to die to a .223 than their family is to know when their next meal will be.

        • Sunfoil@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          1 year ago

          Select fire means there are multiple fire modes, therefore by definition they have to be burst or full auto capable. See what Boebert means?

      • shrugal@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        21
        ·
        1 year ago

        Wtf, no she doesn’t?! I don’t need to know the details of how guns are named to see the effects they have. It’s like saying you can only criticize someone running over people with a car if you can name the manufacturer’s home country, completely absurd.

      • Flying Squid@lemmy.worldOP
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        18
        ·
        1 year ago

        Why does knowing what AR stands for mean you understand gun safety? Do they have a corporate model vocabulary lesson in gun safety classes?

        • Sunfoil@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          1 year ago

          It would indicate you have done passing research on what you are talking about. If people are messing up basic terminology I would be concerned they have a poor understanding of the subject. The same way Trump spoke about stuff with incorrect language showed his ignorance.

          • Flying Squid@lemmy.worldOP
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            8
            ·
            1 year ago

            Why do you need to research the name of a specific gun to understand gun safety? How does not knowing what the initials of one single gun stand for show you have a poor understanding of the subject? Do you have to be familiar with every gun out there to understand gun safety? In that case, don’t let anyone buy a gun until they’ve used every model and knows each one intimately. Otherwise it won’t be safe.

            • Sunfoil@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              9
              ·
              1 year ago

              It’s one of the most prolific gun platforms ever. It would be like trying to regulate trucks without knowing the F-150 is made by Ford. It shows ignorance of the subject, which isn’t what you want if you’re looking to express an opinion. It’s not that deep.

              • Flying Squid@lemmy.worldOP
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                6
                ·
                1 year ago

                You are moving the goalposts. We weren’t talking about regulation. We were talking about gun safety.

                The claim you made was this:

                I would be concerned for your knowledge of gun safety if you didn’t know this too. She’s a lunatic, but she has a point.

                Can you please explain to me how gun safety was taught before the AR-15 was invented despite the lack of this necessary component?

                • SupraMario@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  8
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  No you’re not. This entire post is about wanting to ban the AR-15. Aka regulate it. Stop trying to mask your intentions it doesn’t do you any favors. We all know what they are.

                  • Flying Squid@lemmy.worldOP
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    3
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    1 year ago

                    Again, regulation is not the same as banning. I have no idea why you would think it is. And this conversation you butted into was about gun safety. I literally pasted what started the conversation.

                  • magnusrufus@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    It’s strange that you demand such precision regarding gun specific terminology but your rigorousness disappears immediately when it comes to using terms like regulate and ban correctly. Perhaps until you can use those terms correctly you should remove yourself from any topics concerning them.

            • SupraMario@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              6
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              It’s not about just the abbreviation, it’s the fact that you and a ton of others in here think the AR-15 is somehow more dangerous than any other semi auto rifle. When it’s not. The amount of people killed each year with all rifles combined, is 1/3rd the number of people killed with knives and 1/2 of those killed with feet/hands, which shows you’re not here for a solution to people dying, you’re here to ban something you have no clue about because the media and politicians tell you it’s scary.

              • Flying Squid@lemmy.worldOP
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                4
                ·
                1 year ago

                it’s the fact that you and a ton of others in here think the AR-15 is somehow more dangerous than any other semi auto rifle.

                Please provide evidence that I think that the AR-15 is more dangerous than any other semi automatic rifle.

                Unless that was a lie, of course. I’m sure if it wasn’t a lie, you can prove that I think that.

                • SupraMario@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  That’s you’re starting point…you literally said regulate all guns…aka I want them all banned. And while you may have not said it specifically in this thread, you’re still wanting to regulate something you don’t understand.

                  • Flying Squid@lemmy.worldOP
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    4
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    Got it. You lied.

                    You also seem very confused about what regulation means.

                    I want all cars regulated. I want every car to be registered and every driver to be licensed after being tested for competence. Does that mean I want to ban cars?

                    Do you really think ‘regulation’ is a synonym for ‘ban?’

              • magnusrufus@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                4
                ·
                1 year ago

                The AR15 was designed to be the most effective general case weapon of war to be carried by soldiers. If it didn’t have measurable advantage over other rifles why did the US military adopt the M-16? Select fire is far from the only characteristic that contributes to the efficient lethality of that design.

                • SupraMario@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  They don’t use the AR-15 in the military… it’s still a plastic fucking semi automatic rifle …just like my wood ones that are semi auto…there is no difference. It’s like trying to ban a car because it’s got a spoiler and painted red…

                  • magnusrufus@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    If it didn’t have measurable advantage over other rifles why did the US military adopt the M-16? The M-16 was derived from the AR-15. The semi-auto characteristic is just one aspect of the rifle. No one, pro-gun, anti-gun, or anywhere in between takes the opinion “all semi-auto rifles are the same” seriously, because its ridiculously reductive and just not true. Its weight, length, ease of use, magazine capacity, and ammo type all significantly factor into its performance. Are you trying to be honest or are you emotionally blinded on this topic?

    • Queen HawlSera@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      1 year ago

      If it’s trying to kill me then that is kind of more important than it being called or not called the Assualt Rifle 15