Looking at (political) things in reverse

Post all political posts here.

Moderators: AmBraCol, Hobie

Forum rules
The rules are simple...
- no advocation of violence to anyone
- no cursing

Violation of the rules will result in deletion of the topic.
Post Reply
User avatar
Posting leader...
Posts: 30866
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2007 10:03 am
Location: Hoosierland

Looking at (political) things in reverse

Post by AJMD429 »

Now this is hypothetical, and I know the laws would be hard to interpret, but...

If a person takes an "AR pistol", then puts a brace or stock on it, making it bulkier, and improving the accuracy a bit, which enhances its usefulness, but doesn't differentially enhance its potential for criminal misuse....it's awful and bad and a big-time felony.

Well, look at the 'opposite' process...

What if a person had an SBR (say a 12" AR with shoulder-stock), and removed the shoulder stock....???

Now what they have is simply an "AR pistol". So suddenly it becomes 'ok' (even as per the ATF's recent 'brace regulation') - yet all that was done mechanically was to:

a) make it lighter weight and more compact (even thinner when the brace was folded) - and MORE 'concealable', and
b) make it a bit less accurate (and more likely to be useful for 'spray-fire' and endangering innocents).

So.... it's "ok" to take that 'SBR' and magically turn it into a mere "pistol", even though from the standpoint of honest use versus criminial use - you've made it into a firearm if anything, more marginally suitable for a criminal's use.

There are SO many examples of instances where if you flip the law to analyze the 'opposite' situation, it becomes OBVIOUS that the law is ridiculous.

Another example is that with 'hate crimes'.... Many think it's ok to 'enhance' penalties for crimes committed where the victim was a particular privileged 'minority' such as a brown-skinned person or homosexual person or whatever. Ask people on the street the question "If a murderer kills someone and the sentence would be five years, but there is evidence they picked the victim due to their sexual orientation or race, is it reasonable to add more years to their sentence to discourage crime based on hate and racism, etc...?" and you'll get a lot of "yes" answers.

OK, but let's flip that around to the EXACT equivelent, just expressed with different words: "If a murderer kills someone and the sentence would be ten years, we will cut the sentence in half if the victim is a white heterosexual Christian male." Far fewer will say that's ok.

But it's the same thing. Not sure why today's electorate doesn't understand that.

Another example - the football player who had a cardiac arrest on the field - we are told it is "none of our business" to ask whether he was indeed vaccinated against CoVid, even though we are ALSO told that it was perfectly acceptable to demand proof of vaccination just to go into our favorite restaurant or board a plane... :roll:
Last edited by AJMD429 on Sat Feb 25, 2023 9:54 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Doctors for Sensible Gun Laws
"first do no harm" - gun control LAWS lead to far more deaths than 'easy access' ever could.

Want REAL change? . . . . . "Boortz/Nugent in 2012 . . . ! "
Senior Levergunner
Posts: 1741
Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2007 9:01 pm
Location: SC

Re: Looking at (political) things in reverse

Post by Pisgah »

Take your meds, Doc. You're starting to make sense and will frighten people.
Post Reply