We certainly should be as clear as possible but the fact that there may be some lack of clarity around the edges of a concept shouldn't stop us from moving forward, especially when the stakes are so high.
My heuristic is, folks shouldn't ask the government to ban something if they can't clearly define what the thing is.
-
-
-
If the stakes are high, shouldn't we get the clarity _before_ acting?
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
My take: the judicial system has spent lifetimes defining exactly what murder, extortion, corruption is & I can’t give you the chemical formula for cyanide much like I couldn’t draw out the anatomy of a firearm but if I know the outcomes I can make a good utilitarian case against
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
-
-
ban heuristics
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Sorry, heuristics are banned too
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Have other countries come up with sufficient definitions?
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
The approach should be on the type of round and magazine capacity
-
If there is an AWB, which there won't be, I hope it's this one. Would be the easiest to subvert.
- 6 more replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.