Gun Control Reform Activism

Let's see if we can remain civil.

What are poisons? They are "harmful" chemicals. But that's a tricky classification. Many chemicals can be harmful in high quantities or in specific circumstances, but that doesn't make them poisons. Further, some poisons are useful or desirable, despite their dangers. You don't need to be a chemist to make good judgements about about how best to regulate such "poisons," but you do need to understand some subtleties and chemistry, and you'd be wise to at least listen to chemists who DO know something about the subject, even if you disagree.

Another analogy is global warming. You don't need to be a climatologist to make good decisions about climate policy, but we've seen the result of people who reject scientific advice in favor of desired outcomes.

Guns are machines. You don't need to be an engineer to understand them, but if you want to effectively regulate them and increase public safety, knowing more about how they work, why and how they are lethal, and other facts can only make your efforts more effective, not to mention shelter you from accusations of being ignorant of the subject.

The old "the thing that goes up," is a classic example. That was a reply to a query to a lawmaker (Gillebrand, if I recall) about what a barrel shroud is. Her reply is loosely descriptive of a folding stock, and not at all description of a barrel shroud. If you're going to make a law restricting barrel shrouds, shouldn't you know what one is? You don't have to be a gunsmith to know that, and if you don't know it, what the heck is your rationale for banning them? Just to point out, I do not own any guns with a barrel shroud, or a thing that goes up.

There is no need to reply to me... I'll leave this thread, but I did want to make my case that knowledge is power. If your goal really is to improve safety and regulate the RIGHT things, then a little technical knowledge, or at least benefitting from the technical knowledge of others isn't a bad thing.