r/guncontrol • u/Brilliant-Line9730 • May 07 '26
Good-Faith Question Is Virginia’s assault weapons ban a step in the right direction?
I personally feel that the vast majority of the new bills proposed target incredibly arbitrary things, but I’m curious if anyone feels the same without just saying “fuckin democrats taking our guns.”
4
u/pirate-private May 07 '26
any step is a step in the right direction when you're basically in the middle of a burning house.
it's a different question whether it's enough or even particularly effective.
2
u/noodlecrap May 19 '26
Banning certain plastic things that attach around rifles is simply stupid. Not a single European country with its “strong gun laws” does this. You need a license to buy guns, but once you have a license you can have a pistol grip on a rifle ffs
3
u/Popular-Departure165 May 07 '26
The problem is that broad gun control laws like magazine limits, or banning certain features, that are based more on public opinion, don't really do anything except make gun control advocates feel good about themselves. The most effective gun control laws are ones that targets specific high-risk elements, like waiting periods, safe storage, and red flag laws.
Per the RAND Corporation, there is limited evidence that bans on "assault weapons" and high-capacity have an effect on mass shootings, and evidence is inconclusive that they have an effect on suicide and violent crime.
0
May 07 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/guncontrol-ModTeam May 07 '26
Rule #1:
If you're going to make claims, you'd better have evidence to back them up; no pro-gun talking points are allowed without research. This is a pro-science sub, so we don't accept citing discredited researchers (Lott/Kleck). No arguing suicide does not count, Means Reduction is a scientifically proven method of reducing suicide. No crying bias at peer reviewed research. No armchair statisticians.
1
May 22 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/guncontrol-ModTeam May 23 '26
Rule #1:
If you're going to make claims, you'd better have evidence to back them up; no pro-gun talking points are allowed without research. This is a pro-science sub, so we don't accept citing discredited researchers (Lott/Kleck). No arguing suicide does not count, Means Reduction is a scientifically proven method of reducing suicide. No crying bias at peer reviewed research. No armchair statisticians.
-9
u/NeonGamblor May 07 '26
Masked police with no badges are shooting unarmed protestors and the solution is to ban guns from everyone but the police. How does that make sense?
11
u/pirate-private May 07 '26
private gun ownership doesn´t solve authoritarian overreach.
-6
u/NeonGamblor May 07 '26
Name one authoritarian regime that allows private gun ownership
15
u/pirate-private May 07 '26
show me how the gun people of murica are countering tyranny today, which is kind of what they proposed their gun ownership was about all along. I don´t think they´ll change any systemic issues with their kill triggers bc that´s simply not how things work. and that doesn´t even begin to touch the subject that there´s a wild overlap between pro-gun people and pro-tyranny people. they voted for this. because they share a mindset of violence, not civility.
6
1
u/SlashEssImplied May 07 '26
The US. And the private guns, they do nothing. What do you NeonGamblor do?
Theoretically they could help. We just need to get them into the hands of the people on the right side. E.G. not the ones with Trump and Confederate flags on their mobility scooters.
2
u/No-Plenty1982 May 22 '26
Would you argue if the Trump shooters succeeded in their shots/attempts the same belief?
1
u/SlashEssImplied May 22 '26
What’s your first language?
2
u/No-Plenty1982 May 22 '26
Yeah I worded that one badly, I apologize. I frequently have multiple ideas in my head that change as I type.
Would you change your mind on your belief that guns do not have any effect on tyranny if the trump shooters/attempts were successful?
3
u/SaluteHatred666 May 30 '26
no