("Trigger Warning" to gun lovers, but at the same time, you may see some nuanced argument if you decide to read further.)
Don't get too excited (either positively or negatively) about this post. When it comes to guns, I don't know all that much. Also, I am not an expert on current legislation. What I am simply attempting to do now is come up with ideas of what, to me, "common-sense gun legislation" might be (as it really has no definition at all). What I will do here is use my own common sense. This comes not from using guns (as I have never touched a gun, as far as I can remember), but from playing (very poorly, in multiplayer, where I get destroyed) video games. This would also include at least one or two VR games that I have played, where I have aimed guns in virtual reality with my own hands (although they did not have any weight to them, and their characteristics were based on game physics). And the question becomes, "If I were playing a VR game with realistic physics and the goal was to shoot as many school-goers as possible (from close range), and I could not re-spawn, but only had one life, what upgrades on a basic gun would I want first and foremost."
From the top of my mind, I will give my Top 10 ideas, from most to least important when thinking about the number of kills I would be able to get:
1. semi-automatic (one pull of the trigger, one shot)
2. large magazine (the bigger, the better, until it gets too weighty)
3. grenade launcher
4. small and light (so I can hide it until I get close, and keep going easily)
5. pistol grip
6. red-dot sight
7. other grips / collapsible stock (for ease of use / carrying)
8. automatic function
9. precision guidance (near the top of the list for long-range, but less useful for short range)
10. suppressor (silencer, not necessary for close range in crowded areas)
You may notice that "automatic function" is low in the list, and the only things lower in the list are things that are best used at longer ranges. This is because in video games, if you "spray and pray", you do not do well. You have to aim shots well (even at relatively close range). Also, if you fire in automatic mode, you can put many bullets into one target in a short time, but you waste your bullets on one target.
Having an automatic ability is a good bonus, especially if you know how to do short taps of the trigger (or have it in a mode that fires three bullets per pull and then stops until you pull the trigger again). However, it is not necessary at close range and is best used for suppressive fire at distance. (See, it almost appears as if I know what I'm talking about.)
So semi-automatic is fine, and MUCH better than having to expel the cartridge and reload every shot. That's why I put it as number one.
After semi-automatic ability is a large magazine. I have seen some that contain 60 bullets. That means there is no need to change magazines during that whole time. I understand that some people can change magazines extremely quickly, but even in video games, where it just takes the press of a button, it is always frustrating to change to a new magazine, and I like the idea of having as many bullets as possible before having to do so. Even a 2-second change of magazine (after a 1-second realization that I'm out of bullets in my current magazine, assuming I don't count every shot) may allow someone to tackle me. (And that's a good thing from the perspective of potential victims.)
A grenade launcher speaks for itself. I could clear out a room. However, I might also get hurt.
As for "large guns", there may be some benefits to them, like better stability and aiming, but I don't think that's as necessary when in confined spaces, and in fact a smaller gun would be better, as it could be hidden and would not pose problems when trying to get through narrow doorways, and there is less of it to be grabbed by others. In other words, larger guns seem to be better for longer-range engagements.
I think a pistol grip would be nice to have, as it would improve comfort. After that, a red-dot sight would help with aiming. And other grips would also help with comfort and stability.
A suppressor (AKA a silencer, but not "silent") would be good if I were to sneak up on someone at night and there were not many witnesses around, but they might potentially hear a shot from far away, so I'd like to mask the noise. In a school shooting, it would be close to worthless.
Finally, with Number 9, I would like to talk a little bit more. Precision guidance. There are such things as "smart guns" that pretty much aim for you. One company says that their technology "virtually eliminates poor shots and lost kills" and lets average shooters perform better than "the best marksmen in the world". This is DANGEROUS, and I would be happy banning this technology outright, except for military use.
So what should be done legislatively? I don't know. One thing is the necessity for thorough background checks, waiting periods, and licenses. Not letting people previously convicted of violent crimes own guns would also be an idea. (In some states, people of that sort can't vote, and voting is a right, but I feel that some rights can go away if you show yourself to be an evil person.) This wouldn't matter as much for school shootings, though, as it is usually kids without a criminal record using the guns of their parents. But in this case, gun laws WOULD matter, as 16-year-olds don't usually go on the black market and deal with drug cartels. They usually pick up a gun in the house. So gun laws would do something to help.
If I were in a country that did not have a Second Amendment (like most countries in the world), it would be easy for me to say to ban semi-automatic guns, and have the person do some action to load new cartridges into the chamber for every shot (whether it is a revolver or bolt action or whatever). However, I think that in America, with the Second Amendment, semi-automatic guns have become tradition, and any change to this is unlikely to be possible. We are too far past that point. So the next one would be magazine size.
If magazine sizes were limited to six rounds, I think that would do a lot to stop mass shootings. People could have multiple magazines, but it would be more to hold and be more unwieldy, and every 6 shots, a shooter would have to take a few seconds to change over. Especially a younger person without all that much experience with guns is more likely to make a mistake. This would be the case while someone defending their home with 6 rounds per magazine would likely suffer very little, if any, since that person would most likely be holed up in a room, and be able to "pop out" to shoot intruders, and then pop back in while the intruder cowers (if the intruder hasn't run away already) and pop another magazine in from a covered position. School shooters would probably not have that luxury, and if they did, they would lose track of their targets that they were chasing.
Grenade launchers should not be legal for any individuals.
Honestly, after 2 and 3, there are diminishing returns. Even if there were an automatic rifle, then the shooter would go through 6 shots extremely quickly, and would be reloading magazines all the time. As I mentioned, automatic may even be a drawback during a school shooting.
This only talks about one kind of shooting (a school shooting). And these are not the most common. But most shootings are from close range. Below are some things I might be "common sense" to me.
1) Thorough background checks and waiting periods, etc. No more right to own guns if you have committed crimes with them in the past.
2) Magazine limit of 6 rounds.
3) No grenade launchers or grenades. (It seems obvious...although I don't actually know of any deaths from these.)
4) Do not allow non-military use of any precision guidance guns.
I think that's mainly it. What do you think?
Don't get too excited (either positively or negatively) about this post. When it comes to guns, I don't know all that much. Also, I am not an expert on current legislation. What I am simply attempting to do now is come up with ideas of what, to me, "common-sense gun legislation" might be (as it really has no definition at all). What I will do here is use my own common sense. This comes not from using guns (as I have never touched a gun, as far as I can remember), but from playing (very poorly, in multiplayer, where I get destroyed) video games. This would also include at least one or two VR games that I have played, where I have aimed guns in virtual reality with my own hands (although they did not have any weight to them, and their characteristics were based on game physics). And the question becomes, "If I were playing a VR game with realistic physics and the goal was to shoot as many school-goers as possible (from close range), and I could not re-spawn, but only had one life, what upgrades on a basic gun would I want first and foremost."
From the top of my mind, I will give my Top 10 ideas, from most to least important when thinking about the number of kills I would be able to get:
1. semi-automatic (one pull of the trigger, one shot)
2. large magazine (the bigger, the better, until it gets too weighty)
3. grenade launcher
4. small and light (so I can hide it until I get close, and keep going easily)
5. pistol grip
6. red-dot sight
7. other grips / collapsible stock (for ease of use / carrying)
8. automatic function
9. precision guidance (near the top of the list for long-range, but less useful for short range)
10. suppressor (silencer, not necessary for close range in crowded areas)
You may notice that "automatic function" is low in the list, and the only things lower in the list are things that are best used at longer ranges. This is because in video games, if you "spray and pray", you do not do well. You have to aim shots well (even at relatively close range). Also, if you fire in automatic mode, you can put many bullets into one target in a short time, but you waste your bullets on one target.
Having an automatic ability is a good bonus, especially if you know how to do short taps of the trigger (or have it in a mode that fires three bullets per pull and then stops until you pull the trigger again). However, it is not necessary at close range and is best used for suppressive fire at distance. (See, it almost appears as if I know what I'm talking about.)
So semi-automatic is fine, and MUCH better than having to expel the cartridge and reload every shot. That's why I put it as number one.
After semi-automatic ability is a large magazine. I have seen some that contain 60 bullets. That means there is no need to change magazines during that whole time. I understand that some people can change magazines extremely quickly, but even in video games, where it just takes the press of a button, it is always frustrating to change to a new magazine, and I like the idea of having as many bullets as possible before having to do so. Even a 2-second change of magazine (after a 1-second realization that I'm out of bullets in my current magazine, assuming I don't count every shot) may allow someone to tackle me. (And that's a good thing from the perspective of potential victims.)
A grenade launcher speaks for itself. I could clear out a room. However, I might also get hurt.
As for "large guns", there may be some benefits to them, like better stability and aiming, but I don't think that's as necessary when in confined spaces, and in fact a smaller gun would be better, as it could be hidden and would not pose problems when trying to get through narrow doorways, and there is less of it to be grabbed by others. In other words, larger guns seem to be better for longer-range engagements.
I think a pistol grip would be nice to have, as it would improve comfort. After that, a red-dot sight would help with aiming. And other grips would also help with comfort and stability.
A suppressor (AKA a silencer, but not "silent") would be good if I were to sneak up on someone at night and there were not many witnesses around, but they might potentially hear a shot from far away, so I'd like to mask the noise. In a school shooting, it would be close to worthless.
Finally, with Number 9, I would like to talk a little bit more. Precision guidance. There are such things as "smart guns" that pretty much aim for you. One company says that their technology "virtually eliminates poor shots and lost kills" and lets average shooters perform better than "the best marksmen in the world". This is DANGEROUS, and I would be happy banning this technology outright, except for military use.
So what should be done legislatively? I don't know. One thing is the necessity for thorough background checks, waiting periods, and licenses. Not letting people previously convicted of violent crimes own guns would also be an idea. (In some states, people of that sort can't vote, and voting is a right, but I feel that some rights can go away if you show yourself to be an evil person.) This wouldn't matter as much for school shootings, though, as it is usually kids without a criminal record using the guns of their parents. But in this case, gun laws WOULD matter, as 16-year-olds don't usually go on the black market and deal with drug cartels. They usually pick up a gun in the house. So gun laws would do something to help.
If I were in a country that did not have a Second Amendment (like most countries in the world), it would be easy for me to say to ban semi-automatic guns, and have the person do some action to load new cartridges into the chamber for every shot (whether it is a revolver or bolt action or whatever). However, I think that in America, with the Second Amendment, semi-automatic guns have become tradition, and any change to this is unlikely to be possible. We are too far past that point. So the next one would be magazine size.
If magazine sizes were limited to six rounds, I think that would do a lot to stop mass shootings. People could have multiple magazines, but it would be more to hold and be more unwieldy, and every 6 shots, a shooter would have to take a few seconds to change over. Especially a younger person without all that much experience with guns is more likely to make a mistake. This would be the case while someone defending their home with 6 rounds per magazine would likely suffer very little, if any, since that person would most likely be holed up in a room, and be able to "pop out" to shoot intruders, and then pop back in while the intruder cowers (if the intruder hasn't run away already) and pop another magazine in from a covered position. School shooters would probably not have that luxury, and if they did, they would lose track of their targets that they were chasing.
Grenade launchers should not be legal for any individuals.
Honestly, after 2 and 3, there are diminishing returns. Even if there were an automatic rifle, then the shooter would go through 6 shots extremely quickly, and would be reloading magazines all the time. As I mentioned, automatic may even be a drawback during a school shooting.
This only talks about one kind of shooting (a school shooting). And these are not the most common. But most shootings are from close range. Below are some things I might be "common sense" to me.
1) Thorough background checks and waiting periods, etc. No more right to own guns if you have committed crimes with them in the past.
2) Magazine limit of 6 rounds.
3) No grenade launchers or grenades. (It seems obvious...although I don't actually know of any deaths from these.)
4) Do not allow non-military use of any precision guidance guns.
I think that's mainly it. What do you think?
Comments
Post a Comment