hperrin @ hperrin @lemmy.ca

Posts

4

Comments

855

Joined

7 mo. ago

Ok, let’s try it and see if you’re right.

The second amendment has four clauses, each separated with commas. The way I interpret it (the way it was originally interpreted for over 200 years) is that it guarantees states the right to maintain well regulated militias of its citizens, and that the federal government can’t take away the firearms of those militias.

It’s only relatively recently (2008) that we’ve reinterpreted the amendment to basically forget about the first two clauses and the third command. That’s why the NRA only has the second half adorning their office buildings.

The text:

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

How I interpret it:

• A well regulated Militia
  • being necessary to the security of a free State
  • the right of the people to keep and bear Arms
  • shall not be infringed.

How republicans interpret it:

The right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed.

You must be right since every other country who’s already solved this problem solved it in the way you’re saying doesn’t work.

You’ll never convince me that guns aren’t the problem, because places that don’t have guns don’t have the problem. The evidence is thoroughly and definitively not on your side.

Well it doesn’t matter what you make illegal, because criminals will just get it anyway. That’s why every other country has the exact same gun death rate as the USA, even though guns are illegal in most of them, right?

By that logic, why should anything be illegal?

Yes. Specifically, assault pistol. This new definition adds assault long gun.

I mean, yeah. The cops are scared of assault rifles, not hunting rifles.

No, it redefines it. It repeals the old definition and enacts a new definition. That is redefining. Did you read it?

What do you think happens when the cops show up? (If the cops have the balls to walk through the door and try to save the kids, that is.)

If I’ve learned anything from Pascal’s Wager, it’s that we should definitely believe one (and only one) of them, because if they’re right and they are god, we’ll get rewarded!

Let me put it this way, which gun would you rather have in a gunfight?

If you don’t see the difference between a trained professional plinking with a lever action .22 and a 20 year old mowing down 20 kids and 6 adults with a semi-auto assault rifle, you’re hopeless.

Read the law before you assume what it says.

https://mgaleg.maryland.gov/2013RS/bills/sb/sb0623f.pdf

It doesn’t take “one specific model” off the market, it redefines assault weapon in the text of the law to include any weapon with certain features.

Then you haven’t read the law.

Here:

https://mgaleg.maryland.gov/2013RS/bills/sb/sb0623f.pdf

It accomplishes fewer people dying.

Maryland has seen a decline in gun violence since the enactment of a series of laws aimed at curbing access to dangerous weapons.

And no, it doesn’t just ban a “style” of rifle. The law does ban specific models, but also defines what makes a gun an assault weapon. If a gun has the features outlined in the law, it’s considered an assault weapon, regardless of the style.

You can read the text of the law here:

https://mgaleg.maryland.gov/2013RS/bills/sb/sb0623f.pdf

My friend Greg does. I don’t get it.

Why would anyone give us an even remotely good deal after Trump has shown he’s willing to fuck over everyone for no reason?

The problem is that it’s a common suffix among all of their passwords. That kind of thing is easy to search for in a password leak database.

It’s probably not safe if they use that for everything. Someone could match emails and password suffixes, then they’d only have four letters to brute force. So all it takes is two leaks that your friend is on and they’re at real risk.

Generally, this would be avoided by whatever site storing their passwords as hashes instead of in plain text, but you can’t rely on that.

They should just use a password manager.

Are they flipping out because that’s ridiculous and false?

If it’s tasty I would eat insects regardless. I really just care about the taste. I don’t give two rats’ asses where it came from.

(Ok, I’m lying a bit. I’m not gonna eat human meat, even if it tastes good. Unless I’m like, on the verge of death.)