Conversation

“Bump stock” is angels-on-pinhead level of gun debate. There’s nowhere productive to go once you’re arguing that kind of detail. No big debate ever got resolved once it hit arguments that level. Oh well 3d printing will at least end this stage of the debate if not the killing.
Replying to
I think the assumption was that it was going to be a soft target to go after with regulations, so that politicians could be seen to be responsive.
1
Replying to
That’s what I mean. It helps the optics at best. Doesn’t actually do much to the killing sprees. An actual response would be better than a theater
1
2
Show replies
Replying to
I love that comparison. But on second thought, isn‘t it exactly this kind of argument (in the angels case it was provoked for this purpose - here it is a coincidental fruit of reality) which, due to its „ad absurdum“ nature, kicks discourse out of equilibrium, forces a reckoning?
1