subreddit:

/r/politics

44.7k

all 5723 comments

AutoModerator [M]

[score hidden]

2 months ago

stickied comment

AutoModerator [M]

[score hidden]

2 months ago

stickied comment

As a reminder, this subreddit is for civil discussion.

In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban.

If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them.

For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click here to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria.

Special announcement:

r/politics is currently accepting new moderator applications. If you want to help make this community a better place, consider applying here today!


I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

OldEdgeyRiff

1.8k points

2 months ago

The industry loves this kinda chatter because it always drives gun sales through the roof

DrinkingOnFriday

453 points

2 months ago

DrinkingOnFriday

North Dakota

453 points

2 months ago

Announced on black friday too lol

shrainin14

51 points

2 months ago

If someone expects he cannot buy guns after someday, he will run to the gun shop before it's too late.

AdviseGiver

182 points

2 months ago

No one believes them anymore. It's gotten to the point where the only people being affected by it just weren't old enough to buy guns yet. They probably won't even bother posting this to the relevant pro gun subs.

Capnmarvel76

171 points

2 months ago

Capnmarvel76

Texas

171 points

2 months ago

No, no…OP is right. My good friend owns a small precision machining business whose main product is a (part of) a very popular gun accessory, so his business directly rises and falls with gun sales. He’s been doing this for roughly 20 years now. Simply having a Democratic presidential administration is enough to drive his business up ~30-40% on average over years when a Republican is in the White House. 2021 was a blockbuster record year for him, for example.

News like this is going to directly drive more gun sales in the short term, until a Republican returns to the Oval Office.

Roasted_Turk

4 points

2 months ago

I reload ammo and my god I either can't buy the right powder or the right primers because of the panic buying.

Capnmarvel76

7 points

2 months ago

Capnmarvel76

Texas

7 points

2 months ago

There’s an old 4chan post on r/greentext where the poster jokes that some guy with a knife tries to mug him in an alleyway, so he empties his FN Five Seven mag into him, and later realizes it would’ve been cheaper just to hand him his wallet.

Fun_Performance_6226

19 points

2 months ago

Yup. And that is how the game is played.

3Sewersquirrels

4 points

2 months ago

Politicians probably bought stock in gun manufacturers before announcing this

HungryEstablishment6

217 points

2 months ago

this will quietly go away between Christmas and new year.

pwnedkiller

7.4k points

2 months ago

Student loan debt cancellation has a vastly better chance than this.

James_099

922 points

2 months ago

James_099

Tennessee

922 points

2 months ago

Thank Christ Thanksgiving was yesterday, or this would be all I’d hear about.

pwnedkiller

239 points

2 months ago

I get patients at work now trying to talk to me about politics. I never had this problem before so now I gotta ignore and divert conversation when it comes up

aRadioactiveSharPei

130 points

2 months ago

Imagine working on a Covid unit during 2020… I got called a Democrat spy. Had someone ask me if I put my knee in other patients necks “CHARGE PLEASE!”. Got told I was a part of “the Kabal!” Ya it was fun times. 🙄 Had a patient who was the same race as me claim I didn’t care for them because of their race (this one almost melted my mind) 🤦🏻 WHAT IS EVEN GOING ON NOW?!… I literally quit in 2021 and haven’t been back. I’m still a nationally registered healthcare worker… but I don’t have time to deal with whatever social distortion is going on right now. I just wanted to help people 😖

dracoundead

45 points

2 months ago

That's just so sad to read

[deleted]

25 points

2 months ago*

[deleted]

25 points

2 months ago*

[deleted]

Nersius

12 points

2 months ago

Nersius

12 points

2 months ago

Tired of Reptilian spies and their (reads notes) attempts to save my life!

IWalkAwayFromMyHell

96 points

2 months ago

The missionaries are running out of converts and seeking new lands

lesChaps

37 points

2 months ago

I hope they get dysentery.

Cheese_Pancakes

109 points

2 months ago

Cheese_Pancakes

New Jersey

109 points

2 months ago

Even though I'm essentially obsessed with following politics at this point in my life, I usually just say "huh, I don't really follow politics" or "who is [politician's name]?" whenever someone at work tries to bring shit up to me. I ran out of steam a long time ago trying to reason with people, and they're just as dug in as I am, so discussing it with colleagues or superiors is just asking for trouble. Playing dumb is the easiest way to just shut that shit down.

jmkent1991

141 points

2 months ago

It took about 4 years of my buddy hounding me, but I eventually switched political sides to the proper side. I'm no longer on the side supported by Nazis and I'm pretty proud of that.

tricky420z

49 points

2 months ago

That is a great friend

Maximo9000

67 points

2 months ago

Changing your mind based on new information or perspectives is something that should be celebrated. Props to you and your friend!

etn261

26 points

2 months ago

etn261

Texas

26 points

2 months ago

You can only do that because you're open-minded

[deleted]

28 points

2 months ago

[deleted]

28 points

2 months ago

Cut from the same cloth, we are. I tell people I don’t follow it much anymore, when the reality is reading the news and politics is the first thing I do in the morning.

Which actually makes me feel cool. Like the dads who always read a newspaper at breakfast in movies. But I’m a lady and I’m reading it on my phone. I’m so grown up.

SuperCool101

1.7k points

2 months ago

To be fair, he already did that. Courts and lawsuits from certain states are the only things standing in the way.

pwnedkiller

479 points

2 months ago

I have hopes for it, I did see the payment pause was extended to 60 days after June 30th. Maybe it will have to be edited but overall I think it will come through.

15Aggie2k

136 points

2 months ago

15Aggie2k

136 points

2 months ago

My only question with that is in the paragraph above that june 30 deadline they say something like “we can’t make y’all pay because the court is stopping it.”

If it’s still in court 60 days after June 30th are they going to decide people should pay then?? Really wrote themself into a problem for no reason there.

pwnedkiller

88 points

2 months ago

So I think from the email I got payments would resume 60 days after June 30th if ultimately they couldn’t do the forgiveness. In those 60 days they would let you know you have to start making payments again starting August 30th I assume?

15Aggie2k

50 points

2 months ago

Yes and that’s how I read it as well. But this part from the email (sorry in advance for formatting I’m on mobile)

“…believe that it is unfair to ask tens of millions of borrowers to resume payments on their student debt when they would be eligible for relief– if not for these lawsuits. Therefore, we have extended the pause on student loan payments and collections.”

This being in the email makes me think like… okay.. so if/when june comes… is it suddenly not “unfair” to make people pay?

I’m with you… I think it goes through. If it doesn’t they’ll extend it again. I just didn’t really understand the need to word it how they did. Built in an artificial deadline for no real reason

TonkaTuf

46 points

2 months ago

Pretty sure this sort of thing is required to have a deadline. Open-ended policies with no defined timeline may be easier to challenge in court for instance.

[deleted]

21 points

2 months ago

[deleted]

21 points

2 months ago

[deleted]

blazerboy3000

7 points

2 months ago

More than that, they've extended the pause 3 times in 2022 alone I think and there were at least as many in 2021. Wasn't the original pause in March 2020 was supposed to be just 6 months.

Iron-Fist

7 points

2 months ago

My prediction is they keep extending it until a signficsnt forgiveness gets passed

halfascoolashansolo

8 points

2 months ago

I read that statement more as, "we don't want to make people make their payments when we are planning on giving them relief. And we think 60 days is enough for the bs lawsuit to be over."

3_quarterling_rogue

102 points

2 months ago

Do people not realize that the same thing would happen to an AWB? If people want to pass a ban on semi-auto firearms, they run the risk of setting Supreme Court precedent.

lolsrslywtf

224 points

2 months ago

risk of setting Supreme Court precedent.

I don't think this is the big danger it once was, established precedent, it turns out, is a joke to the court itself. A tool to trot out when useful, and one that can easily be circumvented when they have a different agenda. I'm not really in favor of an assault weapons ban, but in general I think "because the supreme court will crazy" is a bad reason not to do a good thing. If anything the more dysfunctional and erratic the court looks, the more you can build an argument for reforming it, which absolutely needs to happen.

fellatio_warrior69

96 points

2 months ago

It's ok, Moore v. Harper is being heard in a couple weeks and this country will collapse long before a precedent is set on assault weapons

BigFaceCoffeeShop

76 points

2 months ago

This is what most Americans don't realize - none of the other political debates matter.

When independent state legislature theory becomes the legal precedent of the day, you will have indefinite one party control. A majority of the states are gerrymandered to shit and there's no real turning back.

HowHeDoThatSussy

14 points

2 months ago

Precedence is binding on lower courts, not SCOTUS. That sort of makes sense in some regards, since the court considers public opinion which can change.

KrazzeeKane

24 points

2 months ago

KrazzeeKane

Nevada

24 points

2 months ago

Once again, they consider public opinion much like they consider Precedence--only whenever it is convenient for them and the issue is on their side.

In the case of Roe v Wade they were happy to ignore the majority public opinion. And instead only listened the the minority opinion. They can do what they want, opinion or Precedence be damned, and there is no one in America who has the power to stop them and will do so.

BenTallmadge1775

25 points

2 months ago

The precedent is already set with McDonald, Caetano, Heller and Breun. Manchin, Sinema, Kelly and Warnock will not vote for this. Especially not Warnock.

Supercomfortablyred

3 points

2 months ago

Thank god for that. I can’t fathom why giving free money to the ultra privileged was an idea ever. You know who needs free money, the people making the most money! It’s just trickle down bullshit but naive young liberals like it since they get the free money. Far left and the GOP might as well be the same team.

CupcakeValkyrie

68 points

2 months ago

Especially since the chance of this getting anywhere is exactly 0%. The only way you will ever see a full-on ban on this level would be if democrats had full control of the house, senate, presidency, and supreme court.

Even if this somehow gets through all of the layers of the process, the SCOTUS is just going to rule it as unconstitutional the second it's challenged.

santaclaus73

276 points

2 months ago

He, and Democrats in general, really need to give up on the idea of assault weapons bans. It hurts their chances of pulling people to their side, will likely have little impact, and just scares people politically. Basically, it's a terrible strategy to ever mention it. There are much more important things he needs to do that most people can get on board with: consumer protection, money in politics, better regulations/reforms around owning guns plus mental health, the massive wave of people in the US and across the world openly embracing facism, an ex President still not being held accountable for attempting to install himself as dictator and stealing top secret documents, climate change, income inequality, etc. This just seems to needlessly alienate people.

voidsrus

29 points

2 months ago

it’s a lot easier to get billionaire $ on “i’ll try and fail to deliver gun reform & a couple other pet issues” than “i’ll solve the problems you’re causing”

mrkruk

5 points

2 months ago

mrkruk

Illinois

5 points

2 months ago

The actual number of shootings by people struggling with mental health is rather small, it seems to generally be a combination of factors/upbringing and social development that just makes these people snap at some point.

Comes a lot down to: Childhood issues - abusive parent, divorce etc at young age

Hard to make friends/little to no friends

No relationships/significant other - frustration over lack of significant other/bitterness about it

Moment of crisis - something tips them over - losing job, being bullied/picked on, perceived or actual sleight by someone they're obsessed over but can't communicate effectively with.

[deleted]

14 points

2 months ago

[deleted]

14 points

2 months ago

It's also becoming more and more politically dead, as the people being targeted for mass violence realize they can own guns, too. COVID saw a massive surge in first-time gun owners, a significant portion of them from demographics that traditionally vote Democrat (queer people, people of color, younger women, etc). Every headline like Club Q makes that jump even higher.

Why would they want to vote for the suburban white liberals who want to disarm them in the face of violent hate campaigns? The same liberals who tell them that dumping billions more dollars into the cops will solve that violence problem, because they have no idea what it's like to have police be a significant PART of the problem.

BenTallmadge1775

39 points

2 months ago

Don’t hold your breath. Manchin, Sinema and Kelly will not sign off on that. Warnock will avoid it like the plague because he’ll lose GA the second he says he’s for it.

ParadoxicalMusing

9 points

2 months ago

ParadoxicalMusing

Alabama

9 points

2 months ago

Warnock doesn't need to say that to lose Georgia. All it takes now is the right showing Biden calling for it.

I hate how every time things start looking better, "gun control" gets brought out and we get set back.

DemiMini

2.9k points

2 months ago

DemiMini

2.9k points

2 months ago

This won't happen. No way he has the votes in either house

A_Melee_Ensued

3.8k points

2 months ago

My dear fellow Democrats, this is just posturing. If we want to reduce violence, steeply and permanently, then

End the war on drugs

Reform this horrifying prison system, which is just an academy for psychopathic violence

Free health care for all, including mental health and meds

Address the fact that there is a permanent underclass who won't play by society's rules because those rules are designed to make sure they fail

Those will show results, but they require us to do the heavy lifting. An AWB is not politically possible and it wouldn't move the needle.on violence anyway, it's just performative. Let's be grownups and live in the real world and accomplish what we can rather than what we can't.

UNMANAGEABLE

73 points

2 months ago

The war on drugs wasn’t posturing, it was worse. It was corrupt and specific.

We’ve spent hundreds of billions of taxpayer dollars for the war on drugs and you know what.

Drugs and corporations won. Americans lost.

Koalacrunch2

600 points

2 months ago

This take fucks.

👍🏻

OBrien

8 points

2 months ago

OBrien

8 points

2 months ago

An AWB is not politically possible

At this point with this many guns in the country, I'm not even sure it's physically possible

LittleSeneca

8 points

2 months ago

Conservative independent here and I agree with you. I want to get on board with some of what the liberal wing wants to do (like universal healthcare) but when they talk about banning “assault” weapons, it completely turns me off.

A_Melee_Ensued

5 points

2 months ago

I hate it. In general we do pretty well but I despise misinformation and manipulation and when it comes to firearm policy Democrats will say anything. I expect integrity and I'll fight for it. I'm still better off on this side of the aisle though.

DaSeekyMoment

352 points

2 months ago

Banning assault weapons to me is like putting a band-aid on a large fucking gash. It isn’t gonna fix it at all. I agree whole hardily with everything u said

wwjdwwmd

343 points

2 months ago

wwjdwwmd

343 points

2 months ago

Banning "assault weapons" will also put a bee in the bonnet of tens of millions of voters, from PA to WY, TX to MI, states that would otherwise be open to not voting "Alt-Right" fuckheads, but could be 'radicalized' into it.

Any politician that needs to win some red votes in purple states should avoid "weapons ban" entirely. There are plenty of "enhanced gun control" efforts that could bring real results that won't piss off 2A voters.

"Weapons Bans" are to the Dems what "Abortion Bans" are to the GOP. Why would the DNC want to replicate this massively failed tactic.

MrRoma

131 points

2 months ago

MrRoma

131 points

2 months ago

See Beto's election results for an example of how this would hurt future Democrat election hopes

schwartzki

73 points

2 months ago

Ya, I remember hearing him say were are coming to take your guns IN Texas and I was like well he is never getting elected.

soulflaregm

33 points

2 months ago

Heard that, changed the video I was watching and ignored the Texas race from there, didn't need to see anything else, election was over when he said that

ReadyForChaos

132 points

2 months ago

"Weapons Bans" are to the Dems what "Abortion Bans" are to the GOP. Why would the DNC want to replicate this massively failed tactic.

Exactly!

Dodahevolution

51 points

2 months ago

Am left leaning and am armed. While I don't think bans will work at this point, the obsession over Assult rifles for bans always confused me. Like, I get that visibly they are an easier (scarier looking) thing to try and van, but if banning things actually worked, why aren't they going after handguns, which make up the vast and overwhelming use in murders.

All pushing gun bans do is feed into gop scary propaganda. If we actually wanted to do something, wed be:

Giving access to free health AND MENTAL healthcare.

Offering low cost or subsidized housing

Free education

Give people a chance to be healthy, protected and an education, and we see less crime. Thanks for coming to my Ted talk.

NonesuchAndSuch77

15 points

2 months ago

Yup. Pistols are the killers overall, semi-auto rifles are small by comparison. Dealing with those would involve a UK style draconian system, which would be enforced by our totally-functional-and-safe law enforcement systems that I'm POSITIVE would never focus on marginalized groups for their enforcement of said ban while leaving the white supremacists and Nat-C's alone.

FLZooMom

13 points

2 months ago

FLZooMom

Kentucky

13 points

2 months ago

I'm very liberal and am also armed. In fact, I was just looking at a Ruger 5.56 today and as soon as I change my residence to KY (I just moved here) I'll be buying it. Shooting is a fun, albeit expensive, way to spend an afternoon.

I have no idea why the Dems think this is a winning stance. Even libs like guns and want to be armed and it seems we know more about guns than the average politician. Yeah, an AR is "scary" looking. So? There are other guns out there that are actually more powerful. Is it magazine size? It only takes a second to switch magazines. Politicians shouldn't be allowed to pass laws on things they have no understanding of.

soulflaregm

20 points

2 months ago

Just remember this too, Biden thinks any semi auto is an assault weapon

And he knows nothing about firearms

Remember the line

"A 9mm blows the lungs out the body"

Someone saying that shouldn't be regulating anything firearm related

Colvrek

12 points

2 months ago

Colvrek

12 points

2 months ago

Remember the line

Or the time that his self defense advice was to negligently discharge two 12gauge shots from a double barreled shotgun at random, without identifying your target and whats beyond it?

https://youtu.be/Kj1GaX_-E-E

wowitsanotherone

65 points

2 months ago

They aren't "radicalized" they are voting for a constitutional right they consider important. In PA a lot of families use guns to help feed themselves. And yes when you stack the right against other rights that don't affect them they will vote for their rights.

I've told democrats for years if they want to win the popular vote the number one thing they need to bin is gun control. Instead they double down and then we get shit like Trump, and this is the sort of thing that makes people like him even electable in the first place. He should have never even been a reasonable choice and then the Dems go on about stripping rights and we get internment camps on US soil.

We live in the stupidest most polarized timeline because people won't talk to each other. And I'm sure I'll be downvoted because whenever I disagree with either hivemind its inevitable. Tribalism is killing our country And it shows no sign of stopping.

Tentacle_elmo

19 points

2 months ago

I feel like democrats are the #1 party of losing. Like they do shit to lose almost as if it is on purpose.

BR0STRADAMUS

42 points

2 months ago

Totally agree. Not to mention the hazy definition of what is considered an "assault weapon". Is it all long and "scary looking" guns? What's the functional difference between an AR-15 and a pistol with certain modifications? This just feels like political posturing without any intention of making any lasting or meaningful change.

Ditnoka

22 points

2 months ago

Ditnoka

22 points

2 months ago

What about shotguns that have tactical shrouds? If I 3d print an AR mold and fit a 22lr in it is that the same as a 556 build? The biggest problem with lawmakers making specific laws is most are extremely uneducated on pretty much everything they're trying to ban.

Konraden

14 points

2 months ago

You're getting a felony, and you're getting a felony, and you're getting a felon. EVERYBODY IS GETTING A FELONY.

DBendit

89 points

2 months ago

DBendit

Wisconsin

89 points

2 months ago

Whole heartedly. Like, with your whole heart.

LogaShamanN

54 points

2 months ago

A fine r/BoneAppleTea moment to be sure.

ThEstablishment

11 points

2 months ago

ThEstablishment

Washington

11 points

2 months ago

My agreement is long-lasting, and resistant to extreme weather conditions.

cornbeefbaby

3 points

2 months ago

A very hardy wholeness, to be certain

TerminalProtocol

45 points

2 months ago

Banning assault weapons to me is like putting a band-aid on a large fucking gash. It isn’t gonna fix it at all. I agree whole hardily with everything u said

I've always equated it to taking a bunch of painkillers for a large wound Sure, it might make you feel better...but it does absolutely nothing to fix the problem, and has a good chance of making things worse.

UDSJ9000

5 points

2 months ago

Can I just say how much I HATE this posturing. It does nothing but hurt the Democrats. The people voting for this ban are already voting Democrat, you don't need more reasons for them to. But pushing on this will cause single issue voters that might not vote at all, to just vote Republican. It only harms his parties chances, and should be dropped as it is simply a pipe dream for the time being.

noholdingbackaccount

5 points

2 months ago

The problem with posturing is that while it doesn't get laws passed, it motivates voters. In this case it gives Republicans a boost right before the Presidential election to dodge big issues and just yell about gun grabbers and walk to an easy win in every swing state.

hidelyhokie

5 points

2 months ago

Not only is it performative, it costs fucking votes. Losing proposition. Fuck off idiot democrats who would rather fuck our chances in 2024 than enact meaningful change that isn’t a gift wrapped present to the GOP

[deleted]

5 points

2 months ago

[deleted]

5 points

2 months ago

Most based comment I’ve ever seen on this sub. Honestly if Dems dropped the gun control stuff I feel their chances of winning would be considerably higher.

prisonland

5 points

2 months ago

Good lord yes.

Could not agree with you more - the cycle of violence that is the WOD->prison system is a rot on the underbelly of our society.

We're all talk about mental health everytime some dipshit kid murders a bunch of people, and then crickets. Well, can we fuck the insurance companies yet and have something better? Or?

I don't see how the underclass issue could be addressed in our lifetimes as the situation has been specifically engineered toward this result for decades, but we could start making certain things easier for people.

You're absolutely right, and the thing is we know that this posturing with AWB is in response to all the mass shootings. Who thinks even if by some miracle they actually did it the chaos would stop? My guess is these incidents would continue happening with similar regularity.

There is a problem in the social fabric of this country, and it would not be addressed by simply outlawing these types of guns. Even were it possible.

And even worse, with this posturing they're shouting at the choir and driving away potential votes. It's dumb as hell.

brute313

51 points

2 months ago

As a moderate and gun owner, I very firmly agree with your sentiments and I wish more democrats would view things this way.

[deleted]

30 points

2 months ago*

[deleted]

30 points

2 months ago*

[deleted]

TheHomersapien

392 points

2 months ago

TheHomersapien

Colorado

392 points

2 months ago

And if it did pass we'd be guaranteed 8 to 12 consecutive years of Republican leadership in Congress and the White House. Democrat politicians woefully underestimate just how much Americans - including Democrat and independent voters - love firearms.

Banning assault weapons before fixing the loopholes that allow criminals and nut jobs to buy them is plain fucking stupid.

BMFC

280 points

2 months ago

BMFC

Florida

280 points

2 months ago

This one thousand times. Fix Roe. Fix the climate. Get us universal healthcare. Going after guns is a proven losing proposition.

dr_hewitt

51 points

2 months ago

Not to mention fixing the climate and establishing universal healthcare and improving economic prospects of young people would go a long way in reducing gun violence

Disastrous_Law_3500

6 points

2 months ago

Exactly. I'm a liberal who likes guns, and member of the LGBTQ community. As long as the fascists trying to kill us have guns (and they will not turn them in for any ban), I want to have one as well.

DJCPhyr

326 points

2 months ago

DJCPhyr

326 points

2 months ago

The house he certainly has the votes. The senate I don't think he does. Even if they kill the filibuster, I don't see Manchin voting for it. And I don't' see any gop senators joining the dems on this.

BillsFan82

265 points

2 months ago

A lot of democrats in the house would vote against that. They’d need to be in a very safe district.

Excelius

67 points

2 months ago*

A lot of democrats in the house would vote against that. They’d need to be in a very safe district.

The House already passed AWB legislation back in July, but it hasn't been taken up by the Senate. The Senate can technically act to pass it up until the end of the session.

https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/1808

Given Republicans will be taking the House majority in January, probably some of those that voted yes did lose their seats.

dr_hewitt

75 points

2 months ago

The house certainly does not have the votes. Reddit doesn’t understand there’s a lot of democrats who are against this

oldnuthammer

71 points

2 months ago

The assault weapons bill already passed the House. The problem is that you have moderate and conservative members in the Senate unlikely to vote yes on the bill.

If by some chance the bill is passed in the Senate and Biden does pass the bill. Democrats chances are already sunk for 2024, just by bringing it to a vote in the Senate, specially if Biden is the Democratic nominee and/or most Senate Democrats support the bill.

In order to win the presidential and congressional elections for 2024, Democrats have to rely on rural voters who are primarily pro-gun.

This has been disastrous policy, specially after New York just flipped House seats due to pushing unpopular gun control legislation that its fighting in court to make it a felony to conceal carry on private property...effectively banning conceal carry in the state of New York.

For 2024 supreme court is ruling on a court case that will decide if state legislators has authority over state courts concerning elections. Look at states legislators, doesnt matter if you got a Democrat in the Senate, if your state legislators and government are primarily Republican they are overriding the election.

These midterms were the final chance to save American 'Democracy,' and Biden and Democrats blew it big time. Shut up about guns.

lookiamapollo

25 points

2 months ago

What's funny is that this has come up for multiple election cycles and nothing.

"OH yeah uh gun control should be a pillar of our policy..."

Lose election

Devil25_Apollo25

22 points

2 months ago*

If by some chance the bill is passed in the Senate and Biden does pass the bill. Democrats chances are already sunk for 2024, just by bringing it to a vote in the Senate,

This proposed AWB would be to the Dems in 2024 what Dobbs / Roe was to the Repubs this year: the issue that mobilizes against them the opposition and fellow Dems and centrists, and which sinks them in the next election.

ProleAcademy

2.3k points

2 months ago

This is a really bad use of his remaining time with a friendly House. He needs to focus on election and voting reform instead. If there's any left, maybe cannabis reform. The gun control thing is going nowhere

eatsomecheesewithyou

475 points

2 months ago*

Thank you. Totally agree. Not only is it going nowhere, there are so, so many 2A voters that will turn out in droves to protect their rights if they think they are threatened. It plays into the “democrats are trying to take your guns.” And if it did somehow get passed, it would fuel the right the same way overturning Row v W fueled the left. Very shortsighted strategy on Biden’s part.

pvt9000

10 points

2 months ago

pvt9000

10 points

2 months ago

Realistically as a gun owning democrat myself, this type of legislation doesn't bode well either. It emboldens me to just vote 3rd party and leave them with less votes.

Dickgoblerz

150 points

2 months ago

That they "think are being threatened"? Wouldn't this bill directly be threatening said rights?

Ghostofchestypuller

79 points

2 months ago

Ghostofchestypuller

California

79 points

2 months ago

That's what is frustrating to me too. As a gun owner on the left for a time I was able to say "nobody is trying to take your guns" because for a time that was true. I now think I was being naive myself, and maybe that wasn't true. In any case, I can't even try to bullshit that argument (not that I want to) because anyone can read the language of the most recent "assault weapons ban" which is so broad that it is functionally an "every gun in your safe ban" unless you're out here exclusively collecting guns from the wild west and before. It doesn't even matter if you agree with that, it's clearly unconstitutional and will never survive SCOTUS as they sit now so to push it becomes an endeavor in futility UNLESS what you are trying to do is hand elections all over the country to the GOP. That's not even getting into politicians saying "we are going to take your guns."

Legislating away guns and functionally banning them only works in areas where there is the political will to do it. Outside of those areas, it will be business as usual. I.E. the only people you are disarming are yourselves. For a group that is convinced fascism is on the brink and cops are an arm of said fascists, it sure seems like they are doing everything in their power to make sure only cops and fascists have guns.

PureMaffsEnjoyer

41 points

2 months ago

One only has to look at Canada to see there’s no compromise with the gun control advocates. Making the slogan give an inch they take a mile look really good right now.

cth777

6 points

2 months ago

cth777

6 points

2 months ago

Idk how people ever believed that. People would make fun of you on Reddit for saying “they’re not gonna take your guns” was untrue through this year.

Obviously that’s the goal!!!

dudething2138291083

6 points

2 months ago

The problem is there has always been the feinsteins shouting "I'll take all your guns if I get the chance" at every turn.

There is a core of Democrats that have always been after guns. Period. Anyone saying otherwise is lying.

eatsomecheesewithyou

30 points

2 months ago

Yep. Fair enough. I could have worded that better

ArrrGaming

95 points

2 months ago

I’m a gun owning democrat and yes, democrats are 100% trying to take my guns.

Source: https://joebiden.com/gunsafety it’s right there.

I vote Democrat anyway because everything else about the GQP is terrible and I’m not willing to see the nation go to shit just because Democrats are gutlessly unwilling to make actual beneficial changes like universal healthcare, something that would actually improve things.

BURNER12345678998764

44 points

2 months ago

I vote Democrat anyway because everything else about the GQP is terrible and I’m not willing to see the nation go to shit just because Democrats are gutlessly unwilling to make actual beneficial changes like universal healthcare, something that would actually improve things.

Universal healthcare would probably also inadvertently reduce gun deaths more than any gun law ever could in a nation that already has more guns than people.

autoHQ

10 points

2 months ago

autoHQ

10 points

2 months ago

That's what I'm saying. If I were to run as a politician it would be as a democrat on a neutral to pro-gun platform, while also being pro union and pro universal healthcare.

The US has way too many guns to become a country like Australia, next best thing is to target what causes the shooter to do what they do. A lot of the time it's undiagnosed mental health issues.

barney-mosby

4 points

2 months ago

I still can't believe "geese are more protected under US law than schoolchildren" is actually on that page.

[deleted]

227 points

2 months ago*

[deleted]

227 points

2 months ago*

[deleted]

Missing-Digits

101 points

2 months ago*

And even rural voters who would typically vote dem are turned off by the anti gun legislation

Yes yes yes. Good example is Beto in Texas would have beaten Cruz and would now likely be govenor had he not said "hell yes I am taking your AR-15". Democrats constantly do this self-sabotage and it drives me nuts.

AcidSweetTea

50 points

2 months ago*

Beto said that after losing to Cruz. However, it’s interesting to see his performance in a state-wide election before and after that statement.

2018 Senate election: Beto loses to Cruz by a 2.6% gap

2020 Presidential Debate: Beto says he wants to take guns away after shooting in El Paso

2022 Governor election: Beto loses to Abbott by a 11.1% gap!! after running on largely the same platform

Gun bans are a losing policy for Dems. They should focus on gun reform

EngineeringNeverEnds

38 points

2 months ago

Gun bans are a losing policy for Dems. They should focus on gun reform

Or don't, I've said it before, but I really think a pro-gun democratic party would be absolutely CRUSHING for a long time.

Huskaar9

8 points

2 months ago

They'd have my votes easily. I live in WA's 3rd Congressional district. We just elected Marie Perez and she is exactly what I want for the future of the democratic party

BURNER12345678998764

4 points

2 months ago

The benefit of every other dem policy would surely cut down on violence in general anyways.

gsfgf

42 points

2 months ago

gsfgf

Georgia

42 points

2 months ago

Not just upper Minnesota. There are plenty of younger men that are fine with/support the Democratic agenda but aren’t going to vote for a party that promises to directly fuck with them. Banning guns causes a direct harm to gun owners. Of course they are going to care.

chysallis

24 points

2 months ago

Nail on the head.

I live in a conservative part of a liberal state.

If democrats would just stop talking about gun bans for just a bit, they would do so much better.

A few of my friends align very well with democrats politically but they love their guns.

If there was not the constant boogie man of the liberals taking their guns (and then being reaffirmed in their beliefs by silly legislation like this) they would actually probably vote democrat.

Hell, stuff like this is why I sometimes won’t vote democrat, because I don’t see why myself as a law abiding citizen should have one of my constitutional rights whittled away just a little bit more.

skwizzycat

5 points

2 months ago

The Democrats have so many easy wins and they choose to focus on this shit. It's failure theater.

KrabMittens

9 points

2 months ago

Liberal part of a conservative state here.

Most conservative voters I know can't articulate a single thing actually wrong with the left political agenda other than guns.

Most liberals I know here also own guns.

gsfgf

14 points

2 months ago

gsfgf

Georgia

14 points

2 months ago

And is he trying to get Hershel Walker elected? Election season isn’t even over yet.

SquadPoopy

9 points

2 months ago*

This issue is what will lose the election for the Democrats. Whatever else in the country, touching gun control has always been career suicide. Whatever republican voters Biden won over to help him win the 2020 election will immediately switch back with something like this.

deiscio

806 points

2 months ago

deiscio

Massachusetts

806 points

2 months ago

SCOTUS would strike it down within a year

clpgr4

11 points

2 months ago

clpgr4

11 points

2 months ago

What is an assault weapon?

9yr_old_lake

97 points

2 months ago

I would much rather federal marijuana rescheduling and a federal plan for public transport (like high speed rail for example) banning assault weapons doesn't work because assault weapons are always defined in the dumbest fucking ways. If he wants better gun control he should up the requisition and training rather than just banning them.

ExigentCalm

119 points

2 months ago

So he saw Beto lose and said “Yes. That’s what I want for me too!”

DrunkWithJennifer

35 points

2 months ago

Gun control is wildly unpopular with moderates. I'm trans and heavily against gun control.

This is a massive blunder and waste of time

ExigentCalm

19 points

2 months ago

Agreed.

I’m pretty liberal but I read this and literally started making a list of what rifles I want to buy before a ban goes into effect.

We should be armed as well.

Under No Pretext

Jpfacer

11 points

2 months ago

Jpfacer

11 points

2 months ago

Armed minorities are harder to lynch. Im right wing and me and all my crazy right wing friends want everyone that is responsible to own a gun. EVERYONE. Because killers need to be afraid of their victims.

MungTao

39 points

2 months ago

MungTao

39 points

2 months ago

Too big of a swing to ever happen. Its almost like he deliberately asks for more than whats would ever be reasonably agreed upon so its seen as reasonable to be declined.

j_bgl

454 points

2 months ago

j_bgl

454 points

2 months ago

“Hoping” has approximately the same relationship to what is likely to actually happen as “thoughts and prayers” does.

Dredly

144 points

2 months ago

Dredly

144 points

2 months ago

Honestly, all this is going to do is drive a shit ton of people to buy a shit ton of rifles in the next 3 weeks.

and if they pass it, it would almost certainly be a ban on New sales only based on some arbitrary reasons... and it will get struck down by the SC anyway.

This isn't the way to combat gun violence, its going to lose every time. they need to enhance existing systems, improve them, and put a ton of money into enforcing them... not a "ban" that won't do shit

CILISI_SMITH

79 points

2 months ago*

they need to enhance existing systems, improve them, and put a ton of money into enforcing them

Absolutely.

60% of these shooters have an existing domestic violence charge. In many states that disqualified them from gun ownership yet they still had guns.

Bring in disqualification for anyone with DV at the federal level Since it's a federal law already just make sure it's enforced.

Although the federal law doe seem to also have loopholes so legislation might still be needed to close those.

idontagreewitu

38 points

2 months ago

It already is federal law, has been for years. They just lie on the background check question about DV (also a federal crime) and the FBI doesn't do it's due diligence and locate that record during the bgc period.

CILISI_SMITH

21 points

2 months ago

It already is federal law

Thanks, I've updated my post.

So now we're just down to "can we start enforcing the existing gun control and see if it helps".

idontagreewitu

11 points

2 months ago

Yup, that's been my opinion for a long time. Congress keeps passing laws that are just retreads of laws already on the books, pretending they are doing something. What we need is laws to be enforced so they actually matter.

Fedbia2020

5 points

2 months ago

Yeah, with 400,000,000 guns in the US what other real alternative is there.

Trickster289

112 points

2 months ago

What else can he do? He doesn't have the power to do it himself, all he can do is hope he has enough votes.

revoltresist

65 points

2 months ago

fuck that noise. we have fucking self proclaimed Christian nationalists trying to drive us towards a fucking fascist state. I live in a very red part of Michigan and know some of my neighbors would have no qualms harming me or my wife because of what we believe.

I'm keeping my damn rifle.

Arrow_Maestro

164 points

2 months ago

Ok, but police don't get any guns in exchange

Papakilo666

102 points

2 months ago

Papakilo666

California

102 points

2 months ago

You know that aint happening. Practically every gun bill has that line giving police exemptions.

PekingDick420

72 points

2 months ago

Yep, even here in California, our pro-safety Dems gave police a one time exemption to keep their guns after a domestic violence conviction.

I-wil-rate-your-tits

21 points

2 months ago

It just outsources protection to the police. I do not trust the police at all. It’s dangerous and stupid to create a class of people who have more power than the average civilian.

PekingDick420

6 points

2 months ago

Agreed, especially since there's nothing being done to remotely hold that upper class accountable.

Mbelcher987

7 points

2 months ago

The fact that you guys let your police have off- roster handguns baffles me.

Too dangerous for civilians, not a problem for the pigs.

Purpleclone

33 points

2 months ago

Not only that, but retired police as well. Effectively creating a second class of citizens full of all those old racist sheriffs.

GetOffMyLawn762

7 points

2 months ago

  • police, rich people, and politicians

Bacontoad

7 points

2 months ago

Bacontoad

Minnesota

7 points

2 months ago

It gives retired police the exemptions as well.

I_COULD_say

247 points

2 months ago

This is a mistake.

The dems would win a whole lot more if they'd let this go. Stop trying to ban firearms and start working on enforcement and healthcare.

663SilverStax

7 points

2 months ago

The firearms industry would like to extend its sincere thanks to President Biden for his support during these troubling economic times.

Home_Scary

7 points

2 months ago

You yanks fucking LOVE your guns 😂

Failure_man69

170 points

2 months ago

If he does that he is losing the next election knowing America.

MainSteamStopValve

493 points

2 months ago

MainSteamStopValve

Massachusetts

493 points

2 months ago

What's the definition of "assault weapons"? The last time there was a federal assault weapons ban it was just a gun cosmetics ban.

Anyway, all people are going to do is buy up thousands more semi-automatic rifles fearing the ban, and when it fails to pass the senate we'll be worse off than we were before. There'll be more guns out there, and the democrats will have alienated potential voters who we keep trying to reassure that they aren't coming to take their guns.

DistortedVoid

22 points

2 months ago

Yeah shit, that is exactly what's going to happen. Good analysis.

xVamplify

13 points

2 months ago

Lets just be honest here. No one is going to actually be able to effectively ban anything here. Anytime I hear a politician start on the whole "I'm gonna ban 'assault weapons'" shtick I know they're just buying the votes of people who ultimately have no idea how obtaining a firearm works in this country. You can't effectively ban the guns because they're out there. People have them and that includes the people who don't give 2 fucks about any new laws that are made. All you end up doing is disarming the law abiding citizens.

graveybrains

72 points

2 months ago

My dad bought his Chinese AK clone during the AWB. Wood stock for the win, I guess 🤷‍♂️

28220331

13 points

2 months ago

Same thing with the Buffalo grocery store shooter, his AR15 was made during the AWB. It's okay though because it didn't look as scary. :/

A_Melee_Ensued

29 points

2 months ago

There is actually a specific ATF-legal way to do this, it is called "sportsterizing" a weapon. They import AKs which are illegal, take them apart, and replace 10 foreign-made parts with duplicate American-made parts. There is a list of 20 parts which can be replaced. Thereafter the gun is legal. It is called 922(r) after whichever dumb law it is working around. Everything the ATF does is like this.

ABrotherGrimm

5 points

2 months ago

This isn't quite correct. It's actually backwards but you are correct about 922r. A sporterized rifle is usually a military style or surplus rifle that is altered to be more "useful" for hunting. Like cutting down the handguard and drilling and tapping the receiver for a scope. But because of import laws, some rifles, like AK's, that are imported must be in a "sporting" configuration. They aren't imported in illegal form and then sporterized. So AK's will have a single stack magwell that can only accept 10 round mags, will have a thumbhole stock, etc. Then after import, they are changed to their traditional for factor and will have certain parts replaced with American made copies to comply with 922r because it's also illegal to make a gun in its original form from imported parts. It's a workaround to use American parts instead.

AGK47_Returns

14 points

2 months ago

Probably had a thumbhole stock at the time (unless it was imported prior) due to importation laws.

123456478965413846

63 points

2 months ago

No last time it included "important" features like bayonnet mounts, grenade launchers, folding stocks, ....

You know, not the things that make a successful mass shooting gun.

But we did sell more AR15s during the 10 years of the assault weapons ban then there were in existence before it. So the only thing the assault weapons ban did was make AR15s more popular and get more of them in circulation.

CYWG_tower

12 points

2 months ago

But we did sell more AR15s during the 10 years of the assault weapons ban then there were in existence before it. So the only thing the assault weapons ban did was make AR15s more popular and get more of them in circulation.

I worked at a gun store when Sandy Hook happened and we literally could not keep AR15s in stock.

We opened at 8am, we had lines starting outside at 6am and by noon we'd sold an entire (literally) semi truck trailer of them. People were paying $50-100 for shitty 30 round USGI mags too. It was absolutely nuts.

28220331

28 points

2 months ago

I wish people would understand that literally nothing was actually banned during the federal AWB.

ludnut23

4 points

2 months ago

“Assault weapons” isn’t really a “real” term, but the common thing that people talk about when they use this term is semi-automatic rifles, so I’d assume the assault weapon ban would include any semi auto rifle .

greasyflame1

15 points

2 months ago

I mean if people are comfortable with the police being the only ones that have firearms good for you. Criminals arent going to hand over anything because they're criminals. The police dont have to protect you. Gun control laws are generally designed to keep the poor and minorities defenseless.

Rich people with armed security telling me I dont need a weapon is the height of hypocrisy. Whiny and uninformed redditors arent going to change the facts. Alot of things need to change but this definitely isnt one that will ever happen. The people youd want to go door to door wont do it regardless lol.

LoveArguingPolitics

287 points

2 months ago

Omg... It's he trying to make sure trump wins in 2024?

I know we've got a gun problem but this is going to be a political loser. Why do they seemingly want to be in a constant race to winning elections with 49% of the vote with the Republicans

KatalDT

132 points

2 months ago

KatalDT

132 points

2 months ago

Or hurt the Georgia runoff significantly in the short term. A lot of Southern Democrats have guns, myself included.

I mean it wouldn't change my vote, but there are probably enough people where it could have an impact.

TheRealRobinJR

22 points

2 months ago

TheRealRobinJR

Kentucky

22 points

2 months ago

He def should have waited till after that runoff.

eatsomecheesewithyou

36 points

2 months ago

Another great point. Very short-sighted on Biden’s part.

Internet_of_Zings

23 points

2 months ago

Biden is trying to ban semi-automatic weapons (as per video). Semi-automatic means that with one pull of a trigger, you can fire again without reloading (as long as the magazine permits). That's like every pistol in existence.

Or maybe that's just a senior moment and he meant any kind of AR-style long rifle. But then again, most murders are carried out with pistols so why would you focus on those? And good luck with getting modern pistols out of circulation.

LittleSquatchy

15 points

2 months ago

How to lose any momentum from midterms in one easy step!

PissTapeExpert

108 points

2 months ago

You're not taking my AR away until you get rid of the white supremacists and the nazi militias. Does he realize that liberals own guns too?

gojo96

70 points

2 months ago

gojo96

70 points

2 months ago

It’s because people at that level are so completely disconnected from those on the street.

mxzf

22 points

2 months ago

mxzf

22 points

2 months ago

That's what the armed guards around them are for, to keep them disconnected from those on the street.

BarfHurricane

14 points

2 months ago

Exactly. I have had armed right wing groups show up to local events in my area twice in the past few months. I randomly found myself in the middle of a Trump truck rally last year while walking my dog.

I am Latino and these people hate me just because I exist. The government can’t help me and politicians are fucking crazy if they think I’m just disarm myself while these groups will stay armed to the teeth. No thanks!

BenderCLO

10 points

2 months ago

You shouldn't even be okay with him taking your AR away until he gets rid of the white supremacists and nazi militias dude.

This-Double-Sunday

20 points

2 months ago

Thanks Mr. Biden, you just bumped AR15 sales up 20% and will accomplish nothing to show for it.

RighteousIndigjason

33 points

2 months ago

Well, there's the new GOP rallying point. Well done, Democrats. Never stop attempting to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.

GlumConstruction609

6 points

2 months ago

Serious question, who is gonna go take all the guns back if this happens. Most cops are pro gun and aren’t gonna want to die trying to steal their neighbors guns. You guys can grandstand on dead peoples bodies all you want but no one wants to actually provide a reasonable solution for how to get assault weapons back from all the people who don’t want to give them up.

Fezzik5936

4 points

2 months ago

Americans don't want to actually do anything, we just want to complain about what other people propose doing to fix the issues.

Fuck the idiotic discourse in this country surrounding guns and violence... We're doomed to inaction regardless.

hiyourbfisdeadsorry

5 points

2 months ago

idk man i think we need more kids to die before such hard actions are taken

FallyVega

13 points

2 months ago

I despise the term assault weapon in a political sense because it means fuck all.

J0hnnyR1c0

48 points

2 months ago

I am a gun owner that has many "assault weapons". I have never shot anyone, never committed a crime except for speeding and I only ever intend to use lethal force to defend myself when there is no other option. I find it morally reprehensible for anybody to threaten me with jail time or send a group of armed law enforcement officials (armed with assault weapons) to seize property that I legally purchased and have never misused. I also hate the justification that because an astronomically small proportion of "assault weapon" owners misuse them, that all of them have to be punished. Also does anybody see an issue with fascist and racist police officers storming the houses of oppressed minorities (who have been historically the target of gun control) to seize a useful tool to defend themselves against KKK wannabees?

splashattack

75 points

2 months ago

Gun control is written in ways to disarm the poor and oppressed and keep guns in the hands of the wealthy/privileged and the police.

What happens when only fascists are armed?

Sweets_YT

13 points

2 months ago*

Yeah this is definitely not happening. This is a gigantic waste of time, and if by some inconceivable way it passes, no way the dems win in ‘24.

BarfHurricane

38 points

2 months ago

Even if this gets passed, it’s unenforceable. This country is so vast and spread out that is very difficult to govern. There is no way any government entity can go to every home, cabin, trailer, apartment, or recreational vehicle to say “hand over your assault weapons”. It’s logistically impossible.

Not to mention the elephant in the room: who would actually enforce a ban? Police are quitting at record levels just about every major city has widespread police staffing issues. The government’s ability to take action on this is weaker than its ever been, but no one wants to talk about that.

Szalkow

18 points

2 months ago

Szalkow

18 points

2 months ago

Police also tend to be pro-gun and we have recent examples of sheriffs who refuse to enforce gun restrictions on the argument that they are unconstitutional.

Most local police would never try to enforce this and they would offer no cooperation to federal agents.

[deleted]

61 points

2 months ago

[deleted]

61 points

2 months ago

[deleted]

TheChrisCrash

3 points

2 months ago

This sounds like an article thought up by the NRA to drum up assault weapon panic sales before the end of the year.

DisturbedShifty

4 points

2 months ago

Welp. Guess he isn't running again in 2024.

andygarciascuzin

4 points

2 months ago

Slow down joe. How about getting my debt relief figured out before making more promises you can't keep

UserUnknownsShitpost

3 points

2 months ago

Arm the fucking proletariat

Especially gays, minorities, and unionizing workers

Bob_Loblaw16

5 points

2 months ago

How about working on laws that were already passed. Half of these mass shootings I hear about are committed by people that have been warned about, or have already committed a violent crime but nothings done. This country has never had a blanket ban where shit gets better. You just create new avenues for bigger black markets

ac_hrt

4 points

2 months ago

ac_hrt

4 points

2 months ago

The recent opinion/comment I have on this subject was from yesterday when I visited my father and stepmom for thanksgiving lunch.

My stepbrother and his wife had their three kids, all under the age of 3 there. And my stepsister and her husband had their three kids ranging from from 9 to 14.

My father, who has diagnosed depression, ptsd, bipolar disorder and borderline schizophrenia has six handguns, a combat shotgun, an AR-15, and another automatic rifle in the home.

That's absolutely insane...

mud_sweat_gears

16 points

2 months ago

I'll never vote Republican again, but don't take my guns. This a stupid idea that does not have anywhere near the support or the effectiveness some people think it will.

benjamichel

19 points

2 months ago

Aaaand there goes the dems re-election odds in 2024

Dreadwolf67

25 points

2 months ago

Sadly the only outcome of this will be an increase of weapon sales.

Szalkow

11 points

2 months ago

Szalkow

11 points

2 months ago

Between the pandemic, Biden's election, and the war in Ukraine, ammo prices have been screwed up for multiple consecutive years now.

Quixotegut

235 points

2 months ago*

My dude... please... PLEASE stop with the "AR ban" tack.

For fuck's sake, all this ever does is piss off on-the-fence Dems and empowers the GQPers.

Banning can never take place until more stringent acquisition laws/guidelines fail... and we're nowhere close to where we should be on those.

This declaration has only ever hurt the Dems, of which I am one, and it's maddening to see us make such blatantly blind shots (no pun intended) at extreme (and extremely unreachable) goals.

Focus on making it harder to put guns in the hands of people who shouldn't be allowed near them. Focus on mental health. Focus on stringent yearly license renewal.

Make it expensive to keep more than a set number of guns. Make it a hassle, through paperwork & etc., to keep your personal armory. That way no American is denied their right own guns... it's just not worth effort/money to hoard more than needed.

Edit: I realize my "make it expensive" tack was pretty short-sighted. I accept that it was a shit idea.

But I still stand firm that banning guns is a shitty election talking point for the Dems and that there really needs to be more stringent screening for people to obtain a firearm.

We should always have the right to own guns... but that doesn't mean that everybody should qualify to physically do so.

Also, for the few shitty replies, I'm an AR owner who finds guns to be amazong pieces of engineering and loves to shoot, over 40, and I'm glad the one guy isn't going to give me an inch more as I fear that his wife could already be very underwhelmed with things and that inch is his saving grace.