<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40"><head><meta http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=utf-8"><meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered medium)"><style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
span.EmailStyle19
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]--></head><body lang=EN-US link=blue vlink=purple><div class=WordSection1><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><div><div style='border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in'><p class=MsoNormal><b>From:</b> extropy-chat <extropy-chat-bounces@lists.extropy.org> <b>On Behalf Of </b>SR Ballard via extropy-chat<br><b>Subject:</b> Re: [ExI] Russians bots at work again?<o:p></o:p></p></div></div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>>…Spike, you keep “debunking” me by saying that things are accessories or not accessories. However, by doing that you ignore the fact that *I* am not disagreeing with you, merely describing the facts as I see them.<o:p></o:p></p><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>For many non-educated on gun topics, an “accessory” is an indispensable part of the “gun”.<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>I bet money that if you showed someone who wants to ban “assault rifles” an AR-15 with a black stock and a scope on it, and another one with a wood stock and no scope, they would label one as an “assault rifle” and the other as fine, as long as you don’t tell people they’re both AR-15s.<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'>People have an emotional fear of “assault rifles”, due to school and workplace shootings, not data. I believe the data would indicate that the majority of firearm violence in the US is perpetrated using pistols/handguns. <o:p></o:p></p><div><p class=MsoNormal>SR Ballard<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Hi SR, my intention is not to debunk you for you are right on, and one who comes across as someone who knows the topic, certainly better than the people making law on the subject.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>By far most crime, violence, workplace shootings, school shootings, mass murder, all of the bad stuff is done with handguns, for a very clear reason: they can be hidden under clothing. So, just ban handguns, crime goes away, magic. Or rather it would go away if criminals paid any attention to laws.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Yet our helpful legislators never just propose banning handguns. They choose to ban something which doesn’t solve anything because it isn’t the weapons used in crime.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'>We can go one step further: the ban on the AR-15 is sexist in a way, because it is by far the most popular rifle with women (other than the ubiquitous .22 rimfire.) The reason for this is clear to me: they kick a lot less than their larger bore counterparts. The adjustable stock allows the smaller shooter to set it up comfortably, the ammo costs less than the larger bore counterpart, everything is smaller and lighter. <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'>But we can go one step further and ask if there are any reasons why the AR-15 is specifically popular with the teenage female shooter, and I have an answer for that one. If a teenage girl dreams of joining the marines or Navy Seals or any special forces ground assault team, perhaps the best combat job would be sharpshooter, for the sharpshooters stay back in safer zones to cover her comrades. In order to qualify for that job a candidate must already be an expert marksman right up front, in order to win the competitions. So… she takes up the sport in her young teens.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'>As with any sport, if one starts young, one gets way better than those who take it up later. She turns 18, joins Marines already an expert markman perhaps with competition medals already around her neck, she wins competition, gets chosen for sharpshooter school, soon has three stripes on the sleeve, has a good career, retires at age 38 with a pension and plenty of time to take up something else.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'>SR, my apologies if I came across as disagreeing with anything you wrote. That was not my intention.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'>spike <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'><br>On Jun 27, 2020, at 2:10 PM, spike jones via extropy-chat <<a href="mailto:extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org">extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org</a>> wrote:<o:p></o:p></p></div><blockquote style='margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt'><div><p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p><div><div style='border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in'><p class=MsoNormal>> <b>On Behalf Of </b>SR Ballard via extropy-chat<br><b>Subject:</b> Re: [ExI] Russians bots at work again?<o:p></o:p></p></div></div><p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p><div><p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>>…These features seem to be “assault”:<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>OK thanks SR, we can run with this ball.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>The legislation was aimed at the most popular rifle sold in America today, the AR-15. When the California assault rifle ban legislation came out it was clear enough they were trying to describe the AR-15. If so, let us look at the list:<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>>…- black<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Many AR-15s are black, but they don’t need to be. Many non-AR-15s are black, but are not the target of the legislation. In our world today, they definitely do not want to issue a blanket ban on black.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>>…- plastic stick<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>I think you meant stock, but the AR-15 doesn’t necessarily have a plastic stock. The stock on those is an accessory.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>>…- camo pattern<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Ja, it might have that or might not. How you paint your rifle is your own business.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>>…- scope<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Any rifle might or might not have one. My aged .22 rimfire bolt action has one. A scope is an accessory.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>>…- magazine higher than 20<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Another accessory.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>>…- fully automatic<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Those are functionally illegal. You can get one legally if you are rich and patient.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>>…- calibers above .308<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Ja, that doesn’t apply to the real target, the AR-15 which is a .223 caliber.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>>…- side feeding<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Sure. Those are ammo-belt style used in larger caliber fixed placement systems, quite rare for amateurs, for you could fire thru a hundred bucks worth of ammo in a few seconds.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>>…- hollow point<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>That is a feature of the ammo, not the rifle.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><a href="https://www.usa-gun-shop.com/6-best-50-bmg-rifles-for-sale-in-2019/">https://www.usa-gun-shop.com/6-best-50-bmg-rifles-for-sale-in-2019/</a><o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>>…Please note that in the term “assault rifle” assault means “tactical”, or “reminiscent of military equipment”, rather than referring to to the crime “assault/battery”. <o:p></o:p></p><div><p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p><div><p class=MsoNormal>SR Ballard<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>I am with you there. The legislators were looking for ways to talk around their real intent, which is to attack the industry at its most popular point.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>My drive here is to point out that legislators do not write legislation. They don’t even read it unless and until it passes. They hire professionals to write legislation.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>They couldn’t say “no AR-15” for that would single out a particular business, the Armalite Corporation, which would sue the legislature out of business. It would be the equivalent of banning Maytag washer, which would then suggest they were in the pockets of Whirlpool.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Interviews with the legislators after the passage of the ban demonstrated they had no idea what they had just voted on.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>spike<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p></div><blockquote style='margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt'><div><p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p></div></blockquote></div></div></div></blockquote><blockquote style='margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt'><div><p class=MsoNormal>_______________________________________________<br>extropy-chat mailing list<br><a href="mailto:extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org">extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org</a><br><a href="http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat">http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat</a><o:p></o:p></p></div></blockquote></div></div></body></html>