Quote (FantasyWorldII @ 20 Jun 2022 13:26)
So what are handguns, rifles and ar15s? Defensive ha? That guy must have defended himself against the school haha
Ofc you have no issues with owning nukes hahha
As you know some people dont care if their action will kill them... so having nukes around will be a sad day
Handguns are primarily most useful in dealing with threats. I always carry when I'm hiking in the woods, or when I'm living in rural areas. Turns out the mountain lion and bear don't care if you'll "call the cops" on them. But they DO care about the insanely loud noise the gun makes, so a warning shot will scare them off typically. If they're already too close in, a .45 packs enough punch to cause the animal to reconsider whether it wants to attack you, or maybe get away from you and the horrific levels of pain you cause. If a person is attempting to rob/abduct/rape/kill you then a handgun can be useful in the exact same way, and often it's mere presence will dissuade the potential criminal from going after you.
AR-15's are rifles. It's silly to differentiate between rifles and AR-15's. Saying "rifles and ar15s" is a lot like saying "people and blacks". It's very indicative of you hating AR-15 rifles in particular. At any rate... First and foremost, they're low caliber rifles. Personally, I don't prefer to hunt with them. I prefer a higher caliber round than .223. But what about rifles, exactly? They are great for hunting, they're great for defensive usage (I have some Rittenhouse footage, if you don't understand how), they're also great for offensive usage, and any number of things.
The fact that you can get something doesn't mean you will get something. Sears sold the Thompson Submachinegun via it's catalog for decades. Or I should say, they DIDN'T sell it, but they offered it, at a ridiculously low price, and nobody was interested. Full auto is not practical. Likewise, if private ownership of nukes became a thing, most wouldn't purchase them. They're not practical. Nearly any situation where you'd need to defend yourself, you can't use a nuke without killing yourself.
Regarding the whole "some people don't care if they die" thing... Who says you need a nuke to kill thousands of people if you're willing to die? How about fertilizer? How about an airplane? You can buy both of those easily enough, assuming you can afford them. How about chlorine gas? The person unafraid to die could spend $20 down at walmart, and quite easily combine the ingredients to make chlorine gas and put it in front of the intake screen of an air venting system. That plus $50 worth of chains and locks to insure no exits, and that's a far more certain way to commit mass murder/suicide than a gun, far cheaper too. The nuke could maybe work to kill more, the problem again with the nuke is how to make it. Just the components necessary would cost you more than 99.9% of the population has. That's not because they're so heavily controlled, but more in the extreme difficulty of making all the components, and refining the uranium, and timing the explosions so all the weapons-grade uranium reach the exact same spot at the exact same time to set off the reaction. It's not simple, easy, or cheap. And those willing to put in that level of effort are very unlikely to be suicidal.
This post was edited by InsaneBobb on Jun 20 2022 03:03pm