SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : The Trump Presidency
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: TimF who wrote (56897)2/19/2018 3:06:11 PM
From: Lane31 Recommendation

Recommended By
one_less

  Read Replies (2) of 359938
 
I don't think banning all semi-automatic weapons is practical either politically, or in terms of enforcement if such a policy could get enacted.

One thing missing from the conversation is the potential downside of banning them. Those who want them banned never mention and probably never consider any potential downside. The only place you get the negatives on any proposal is from the opposition, who have thought it through. In this case, though, that is missing because those in opposition don't analyze the proposal either because they just blow the idea off on grounds of the 2nd amendment and/or dismiss the banning as ineffective out of hand.

I'm wondering if you could put aside both the 2nd amendment thing and the likelihood of success/waste of time and money thing for the sake of argument and consider what might be the purely practical negative effects of banning them. What holes might their absence leave or what costs might be incurred?
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2026 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News