It’s the same how many conservatives couldn’t care less if their kid sees a pg-13 level of a hookup in a movie, but cries if there’s a gay couple in a pixar KID movie.
Who cares he has 47 weapons. You only have 2 hands. What you think he is going to do? Strap 30 glocks to his leg?
Who cares he has 26000 rounds. Do you know how heavy ammo is? What you think is he going to do? Walk around with a shopping cart full of ammo? Strap 50 magazines to his chest?
It still amazes me that people fall for this "quantity " argument. It means nothing. Someone is not more dangerous with 500 rifles or 5 rifles.
Yeah I mean to be fair there are tons of gun enthusiasts that also have an insane number of guns and ammo (because they regularly go shooting at a range or something for fun).
It goes to show how sometimes it’s not just because they’re enthusiasts though but because they’re actually nuts. Seeing as this guy was a judge I doubt there would be any way of stopping him from stockpiling that much weaponry.
Well isn’t that exactly the point? What possible reason does a murderer need with 47 guns and 26,000 rounds of ammunition? He only has two hands and couldn’t conceivably carry a tenth of that at any given time.
There’s a few reasons people collect guns. Some people just like guns, and appreciate the craftsmanship and variety of weapons. Like any hobby, it’s easy to end up with way more stuff than might seem reasonable to an outside observer.
But this guy was a judge. If he was an avid stamp collector, and had a basement full of stamps, nobody would care that he had an obsessive hobby until he decided to dissolve his wife in a vat of stamp preservative or whatever. 47 might seem like a reasonable number of guns to a lot of folks, but we can all agree that’s still more than anyone needs for things like hunting or self defense.
Another reason to collect guns is because you’re prepping for… something. Collapse of some sort, or maybe the government is going to start piling up bodies so they can take guns from cold, dead hands. Whatever happens, you’re going to need weapons in all calibers, and ammo will become the new currency.
But again, this guy was a State Supreme Court Justice, and not for some podunk state like that one state we’re all thinking of. No, he was among the top jurists in Califuckingfornia, a high arbiter of justice and the rule of law in the most populous and prosperous state. If this piece of shit was also a prepper, what in the sam hill is he prepping for?
There are probably other reasons to have a big collection of guns. But given that he murdered his wife, I think we can agree that his specific, violent version of crazy is relevant to the conversation.
Yes you got the point. I’ve heard that in Israel you can have one gun. When you leave the shooting range you must buy 50 bullets. If you go back and have less than 50 bullets, they need you to justify why that’s the case, or they refer it to police or something. I know something like this would not fly in America, but maybe it’s a regime we could work our way towards
Yeah, it’s pretty easy to tell that you haven’t been around guns much. 50 rounds isn’t much and isn’t reasonable for any purpose from hobby to sport usage or even proficiency for someone who uses them professionally. The amount of ammo I shoot on any given range trip? Varies from 20 to hundreds and hundreds of rounds; it depends on the day, weather and dozens of other factors. Even the concept of only being able to buy a single box the day of is hugely problematic. For the most common calibers like 9mm prices over the past decade have varied from less than $ .30 a round to over $2.00 per round, if you could even get it. There have been periods of months to years where getting a single box every 3 months was difficult/near impossible. I have one rifle that is a family heirloom that I haven’t found ammunition in stock for over a decade and have never shot it since inheriting it.
The ammunition market is 100 times more volatile than a cardboard box soaked in gasoline holding 100lbs of gunpowder. Having a few thousand rounds doesn’t mean you’re planning anything bad, it’s a drop in the bycket to sustain occasional shooting for 6 months despite never ending supply issues that have been going on for years. If I see ammo at a fair price I buy as much of it as I can. On any given day I might be able to shoot half of the guns I own if I so desire due to the availability of ammo, and that includes the stuff I make on my own in my garage.
I’ve been around guns. I know 50 rounds is practically nothing. I was shocked when my friend explained the law there to me. Just providing an alternative perspective
Limiting ammunition isn’t effective, Limiting magazine capacity on the other hand. I live in Europe where firearms are heavily regulated, yet they don’t care about the amount of ammunition. In fact, you always get a 30% discount if you buy bulk and bulk means per 1000 for quality and per 1400 for surplus. If you have 6 different calibers it adds up quickly. That’s how much they care. There is a limit on the weight of total gunpowder before you need a fireworks storage permit though… there are a lot of gun owners in Europe, but we don’t practice in schools and shopping malls, I don’t know what is wrong with America
I also don’t know what is wrong, but as a citizen here, I’d like to try anything and everything to prevent mass murder. I don’t see how limiting ammunition wouldn’t work towards that goal
I also like firearms. And I am a normal european 9to5 guy with a job in health care. Over here being interested in firearms means nothing, it’s not different from, let’s say, owning a horse ;)
So the right wing party was ordered to pay £20k total, (£10k to each father,) and hasn’t even paid yet because it’s still tied up in appeals court.
Sounds like they got to run a political ad campaign for only £20k, which is incredibly cheap once you consider all the parts that go into developing and running a campaign.
On the one hand, it’s great that the fathers have won. But on the other, it’s horrible that the penalty was so low. When you get into politics, £20k is a drop in the bucket.
Conspiracy theory here. Please note the high level of conspiracy-ness of this.
Hawaii is pretty isolated from the rest of the mainland. Getting things to Hawaii is pretty difficult. Getting business in Hawaii is pretty difficult without a lot of handshakes.
A lot of businesses were burned. Local Hawaiian businesses. Hawaiian corporations. The Hawaiian Old Guard. A robust fire system suddenly not working?
If we see a bunch of multinationals move in to help repair, and “stay a bit longer”, then I’m going to call it a takeover.
It’s not like this type of action doesn’t have historical roots either.
I have a buddy who helps out with fires on another island. Their department asked if help was needed during the fires and was denied multiple times. My buddy says it was probably bad training, which seems to fit with a lot of the story. Lots of disasters happen because of bad training.
Once you’ve got a critical mass of productivity online, it’s time for utilities to get out of the business of burning hydrocarbons and selling steady-state electricity- and into the business of capturing daytime surpluses, selling it back to the grid at night
The point, of course, is that there’s never been a shortage of energy- only scarcity of readily-available stored power at a given place or time, sometimes
The excuse always has been that there isn’t one energy storage solution that takes up minimal space, has the same efficiency, requires little maintenance, doesn’t affect the environment, is cheap, and works everywhere. There are tons of solutions that would work but as soon as one of those prerequisites are lacking, the solution is deemed inadequate and we’re back to the slow sacrifice of the environment. Anything short of perfection isn’t enough to be convincing.
news
Newest
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.