Post count: 1234

And, yet, pistols are more commonly used in mass shootings and cause more deaths in mass shootings.

Again, this is a fact. Not an opinion.

if you define mass shootings a 4 or more (the current FBI standard, I think) then yes but as I said there is an argument that a pistol LEGITIMATELY serves a purpose that MITIGATES somewhat against the risk. ARs don’t have that same outcome in the analysis.

You’re also just thinking of it in the clinical sense when all gun violence has repercussions beynd the actual loss. the handgun might survive that, but the AR is less likley to do so for the reasosn described

Lastly, on the “enforcement” I can only say unevenly and unfairly, at least in the eyes of people who share your views.

I say that because of the technical issues, but mostly because your side of the equation mostly has a “take my ball and go home” approach, simultaneously professing expertise while refusing to apply it. If you were to go twitter tight now you’d see gun people tweet things like “AR in AR-15 means armalite, not assault rifle.” Funny, but that “your too dumb” ([sic] intended) approach means that your side INTENTIONALLY leaves their fate in the hands of “dummies” which begs the question as to who is really the “dummy,’ figuratively speaking?

change is inevitable and as with everything in politics the “my way or the highway” approach leads to overreactions, bad laws etc. But . . . “slippery slope” and “2A!”. . . so