Thanks for your response. I still don't buy that a law would ever be passed that made 12% of people instant felons, and I don't think you do either. For what it's worth, here in the SF Bay Area all the local races focused on public safety and increasing the number of police. Number one issue here, I'd say.
Thanks for your response. I still don't buy that a law would ever be passed that made 12% of people instant felons, and I don't think you do either. For what it's worth, here in the SF Bay Area all the local races focused on public safety and increasing the number of police. Number one issue here, I'd say.
It passed in Oregon by ballot initiative. I imagine Oregon is relatively close to that 12% number, and they've got rural sheriffs already saying publicly they won't enforce it.
So yes, it can definitely pass, but it won't be enforced because of sanctuaries, and then it will only be used to stack charges on black people who live in blue districts. Here's an analysis of what happened in Virginia:
The Virginia proposal also did not pass. I love the name of your substack, but was hoping for more facts behind the freakoutery.
The anti-assault weapon people want to avoid the slaughter of innocent people, kind of like they disapproved of the 9/11 terrorist attacks. The pro-assault weapon people, on the other hand, seem to be more focused on overthrowing the government, an endeavor that has been less successful.
They do have a "you get to keep your old mags" provision in it, but there's no way to track who's mags are old or not, so it's not technically criminalization of 12% of their population, but it's close. Rural sheriffs have already come out and said they won't enforce it, which is exactly what was happening in VA in response to their proposal.
There is one and only one thing currently going that could set off a civil war, and it's if the AWB gets passed and enforced.
This is the part that puzzles me. Why are these assault weapon-carriers so scared? The murder rate in Oregon is 3.8 per 100,000. Virginia is 6.44/100,00. Here in Oakland is 23.3 per 100, 000, higher even than the most heavily armed red state (Mississippi, at 20.5.) And yet it never crosses my mind that I should be armed with an AR-15, even in the more dangerous parts.
Again, I appreciate your willingness to engage with me on this topic.
Different people own them for different reasons. AR-15s are very suboptimal for self defense outside of the home, because you can't really carry them around. They're also pretty shitty murder weapons because they're not concealable. They're not even great at mass shootings because you can fit more 9mm in a backpack and kill as many kids with a pistol.
But they are the superior weapon for gunfights with other armed opponents, and many of them have done the math on that. This article was one of my post popular, which does that math:
Thanks, lots of interesting reading (the Bosnia guy in particular.) I do think that if some of these death threat-making people were to act on their threats we could have a precarious situation; but so far something has stopped them. Here, our main threat is earthquakes, and we are moderately well prepared and do have one pistol. Not a room full of Bic lighters though!
The fact that we have 400 million guns in this country and we didn't cook off in 2020 says to me that revolution is still pretty far off. And I was in the camp of predicting it pretty soon in 2018.
Thanks for your response. I still don't buy that a law would ever be passed that made 12% of people instant felons, and I don't think you do either. For what it's worth, here in the SF Bay Area all the local races focused on public safety and increasing the number of police. Number one issue here, I'd say.
It passed in Oregon by ballot initiative. I imagine Oregon is relatively close to that 12% number, and they've got rural sheriffs already saying publicly they won't enforce it.
So yes, it can definitely pass, but it won't be enforced because of sanctuaries, and then it will only be used to stack charges on black people who live in blue districts. Here's an analysis of what happened in Virginia:
https://opensourcedefense.org/blog/collateral-damage-race-and-the-virginia-gun-control-bill
It looks like that initiative didn't even make it to the ballot, much less get passed. https://ballotpedia.org/Oregon_Prohibition_on_Semiautomatic_Firearms_Initiative_(2022)
The Virginia proposal also did not pass. I love the name of your substack, but was hoping for more facts behind the freakoutery.
The anti-assault weapon people want to avoid the slaughter of innocent people, kind of like they disapproved of the 9/11 terrorist attacks. The pro-assault weapon people, on the other hand, seem to be more focused on overthrowing the government, an endeavor that has been less successful.
Oregon 114 is a 10 round mag ban.
They do have a "you get to keep your old mags" provision in it, but there's no way to track who's mags are old or not, so it's not technically criminalization of 12% of their population, but it's close. Rural sheriffs have already come out and said they won't enforce it, which is exactly what was happening in VA in response to their proposal.
There is one and only one thing currently going that could set off a civil war, and it's if the AWB gets passed and enforced.
This is the part that puzzles me. Why are these assault weapon-carriers so scared? The murder rate in Oregon is 3.8 per 100,000. Virginia is 6.44/100,00. Here in Oakland is 23.3 per 100, 000, higher even than the most heavily armed red state (Mississippi, at 20.5.) And yet it never crosses my mind that I should be armed with an AR-15, even in the more dangerous parts.
Again, I appreciate your willingness to engage with me on this topic.
Different people own them for different reasons. AR-15s are very suboptimal for self defense outside of the home, because you can't really carry them around. They're also pretty shitty murder weapons because they're not concealable. They're not even great at mass shootings because you can fit more 9mm in a backpack and kill as many kids with a pistol.
But they are the superior weapon for gunfights with other armed opponents, and many of them have done the math on that. This article was one of my post popular, which does that math:
https://hwfo.substack.com/p/the-surprisingly-solid-mathematical
Thanks, lots of interesting reading (the Bosnia guy in particular.) I do think that if some of these death threat-making people were to act on their threats we could have a precarious situation; but so far something has stopped them. Here, our main threat is earthquakes, and we are moderately well prepared and do have one pistol. Not a room full of Bic lighters though!
The fact that we have 400 million guns in this country and we didn't cook off in 2020 says to me that revolution is still pretty far off. And I was in the camp of predicting it pretty soon in 2018.