Agency leaders said there was evidence to justify approval only for older people and those with medical conditions. Many others may not be able to get the shots.
We still don’t need people to be able to fire more bullets per minute. The risk/benefit for society is pretty clearly against allowing devices like that.
The evidence doesn’t support the outsized FUD. Firearms in general are dangerous. A $500 novelty that very few gun owners will ever purchase or install isn’t a serious safety concern. Seemingly only one instance of one being used in a shooting in Fargo in 2023. That situation was tragic, and the police who responded likely prevented the shooter from committing a larger and more destructive attack. But the fact remains that these things are novelties or gimmicks. They make shooting the gun worse in nearly every way, and have extremely limited practical application.
Shitty argument that subjectively implies a min/max. Exactly how many people need to be killed by rapid-fire mods for you to change your mind? No, don’t butwhatabout some other unrelated statistic… Spell it out. What number of people dying will be enough for you to decide that increasing the fire rate of firearms should not be done?
That’s a good question, how many people need to die from sugar before it’s banned? Or pools without fences? Or animals dying from plastic? Or junk food? Knives? What is the threshold for liberty and safety?
We still don’t need people to be able to fire more bullets per minute. The risk/benefit for society is pretty clearly against allowing devices like that.
lifelong gun owner and I agree completely
The evidence doesn’t support the outsized FUD. Firearms in general are dangerous. A $500 novelty that very few gun owners will ever purchase or install isn’t a serious safety concern. Seemingly only one instance of one being used in a shooting in Fargo in 2023. That situation was tragic, and the police who responded likely prevented the shooter from committing a larger and more destructive attack. But the fact remains that these things are novelties or gimmicks. They make shooting the gun worse in nearly every way, and have extremely limited practical application.
you just basically shot your argument in the foot, if they aren’t that important to have, then there is no real need to have them in the first place.
Many things aren’t important. Life isn’t about strict necessity.
Shitty argument that subjectively implies a min/max. Exactly how many people need to be killed by rapid-fire mods for you to change your mind? No, don’t butwhatabout some other unrelated statistic… Spell it out. What number of people dying will be enough for you to decide that increasing the fire rate of firearms should not be done?
That’s a good question, how many people need to die from sugar before it’s banned? Or pools without fences? Or animals dying from plastic? Or junk food? Knives? What is the threshold for liberty and safety?
So in other words, these restrictions actually work. Got it.