Hacker News Reader

Comment by bluejekyll | Hacker News Reader

Guns are legal in every single state.

States like California, NY, NJ basically try to inconvenience you out of owning them, banning normal capacity magazines and random arbitrary features on rifles, and making it difficult to impossible to get a handgun permit. The tactics are often similar to those of anti-abortion states. The last remaining gun store in Los Angeles (or some similar area) was forced to close a while ago.

great point. So inconvenience is the exact same as execution.

Guns remain legal in every state and there is no permutation under which ownership thereof threatens your execution.

But the equating of inconvenience and capital punishment is illustrative, isn't it?

When you're accustomed to privilege, equality feels like oppression, whether leveling up or down.

People gunned down by the ATF for making machine guns seem to exist.

They do it for much less. See Waco and Ruby Ridge.

The bit about getting a handgun permit is completely untrue. You can buy a handgun over-the-counter in California with no more than the normal waiting period and safety test (multiple choice test you take every five years. If you meant a handgun concealed carry permit being nearly impossible, well---yeah that's true in most of California with the exception being Orange County (practically shall issue).

> The last remaining gun store in Los Angeles (or some similar area) was forced to close a while ago.

Maybe you should verify the information you consume before repeating it as fact.

It looks like guns are still available in LA [0].

[0]: https://www.google.com/maps/search/gun+store/@34.0212335,-11...

> banning normal capacity magazines

Why is this an issue?

> random arbitrary features on rifles

Why do you need: 1) pistol grip 2) bayonet lug 3) telescoping or folding stock 4) flash suppressor 5) threaded barrel 6) grenade launcher 7) muzzle brake 8) muzzle compensator 9) thumbhole stock 10) foregrip (source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_laws_in_New_York#Overview)

I live in NYC and none of the above bans are an issue for home defense or hunting. When I asked my green beret friend what to buy for in-home defense he simply replied "A mossberg or benelli pump action and a box of bird and a box of buck shot. Load up two rounds of bird and the rest buck. If the first two shots doesn't stop or scare em off, the buck will."

Most people I know who complain loudly about these bans are the types who like cosplaying gi joe and tell me things like "holding a gun makes me feel powerful." This is why I support theses kinds of bans, to keep high capacity killing weapons out of the hands of the mentally ill.

> green beret friend ... If the first two shots doesn't stop or scare em off, the buck will.

Cool story but no gun person would actually give that advice. The shotgun part, yes, because you will not get overpenetration in a flimsy apartment building. But not the loading non-lethal rounds first part.

And why shouldn't you have any of those and more? Why should the state ban citizenry from having tools that could be effective in protecting themselves against it? What do they fear? What do they plan?

Bazookas for everyone!

1) More grip options are more accessible, and allow a familiar feel between two different guns.

2) safer than trying to fight with a knife directly.

3) More convenient storage, support for differently sized people to safely use a firearm.

4) Prevent blinding flashes of light.

5) allow a suppressor to be attached which prevents hearing loss.

6) launching flares for locating without direct LOS.

7) reduced recoil for better accuracy or smaller/weaker people to safely use a gun.

8) Similar to 7.

9) similar to 1.

10) safety, accessibility, increased accuracy

These bans tend to only ever make guns more dangerous or less accessible. The fact some people may be able to also buy a gun that looks (not works) like some military forearm is irrelevant.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com