Gun control hasn’t been a big issue during the 2025 election like it was in 2021. But it’s still important to assess the gun policies of the two parties leading in the polls.
Please point out any. I know there are models that fit European standards instead of North American, but they aren’t arbitrarily banned because “they look scary.”
Well not, I assumed you were not literally meaning they are banned because they “look scary”… I assumed a more rational interpretation like they “do not meet safety standards and/or do not meet environmental standards”
It’s not a strawman. I am all for gun safety, but the rifles that have been recently “prohibited” are simply models that “look scary” while their sporterized counterparts have had their classification unchanged.
That’s not how legislation is typically written. Anyways, just because someone states their purpose doesn’t mean that’s actually their intentions. If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it probably is a duck.
I’m more than happy to support any measures which actually increase safety, but prohibiting these guns is just for show. Putting forward ineffective legislation like this wastes political capital which could have instead been used to actually make our society safer.
Please point out any. I know there are models that fit European standards instead of North American, but they aren’t arbitrarily banned because “they look scary.”
Well not, I assumed you were not literally meaning they are banned because they “look scary”… I assumed a more rational interpretation like they “do not meet safety standards and/or do not meet environmental standards”
I will not find examples to fit your strawman
It’s not a strawman. I am all for gun safety, but the rifles that have been recently “prohibited” are simply models that “look scary” while their sporterized counterparts have had their classification unchanged.
Ok I guess it’s time to be pedantic.
Please show me the part of the legislation that says the weapons are banned due to the fear their appearance may induce.
Or, are you willing to admit this is just your interpretation of a likely imperfect list the government came up with?
That’s not how legislation is typically written. Anyways, just because someone states their purpose doesn’t mean that’s actually their intentions. If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it probably is a duck.
I’m more than happy to support any measures which actually increase safety, but prohibiting these guns is just for show. Putting forward ineffective legislation like this wastes political capital which could have instead been used to actually make our society safer.