• disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    3 days ago

    Why can’t non-hunting firearms just be relegated to shooting range ownership? Legitimate question for gun owners, no sarcasm intended.

    • ikidd@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 days ago

      Because they live on enough land to shoot there? Not everyone has a 10,000 sf yard.

    • KISSmyOSFeddit@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      2 days ago

      This would make shooting ranges a prime target for break-ins by highly professional organized crime syndicates and terrorist groups looking to arm themselves, which they don’t have the means to protect against.

    • gamermanh@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 days ago

      I 100% advocate for this, as do many of my gun owning and enjoying friends. Most reasonable gun owners I’ve met are fine with everything non-hunting but pistols be lock-up-at-range. I get that pistols are used in a lot of crime but there are legitimste uses for them outside of shooting other humans (I get coyotes where I live and if ones trynna get at my birds I’m not gonna go get a rifle, I’ll reach at my hip for my pistol, for example)

      Though, usually, it’s also stipulated that support for this idea would require that the currently existing restricted things be brought under this umbrella. I’d love to fire off some illegal as fuck weaponry in a controlled environment where my accuracy can be tracked using modern camera equipment and other cool shit, yakno? Kinda like the idea behind axe throwing or those “destroy shit” rooms

    • Tayb@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 days ago

      There isn’t really a hunting versus non-hunting firearm is the primary reason. People do use AR pattern rifles to hunt in certain states. Disabled hunters can find that the rifle is easier to handle where a more “traditional” style rifle isn’t as well. It’s just a really tough distinction to even start making.

      • Diplomjodler3@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 days ago

        It’s a very easy distinction. A semi-automatic rifle is not a hunting rifle. A hitting rifle is a bolt-action. There is absolutely no legitimate reason for any private individual to own a semi-automatic rifle.

        • SkyezOpen@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          21 hours ago

          Wow this is lever-action erasure and I won’t stand for it.

          Hey maybe don’t talk about guns if you don’t know about guns.

        • BaroqueInMind@lemmy.one
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          2 days ago

          A semiautomatic rifle is 100% a hunting rifle, because it’s designed for hunting other humans. There is a legitimate reason for private individuals to own one: disabled, elderly, and women can use easier due to its ergonomics.

          Could you imagine a world where we socially gated hobbies based on your physical abilities?

        • Rakonat@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 days ago

          Bolt action has nothing to do with hunting rifle. As the person you replied to stated, people use a wide variety of rifles and other weapons to hunt with based upon what they are hunting, where, and their own physical capabilties. Semiauto rifles have been sold as hunting rifles for the last 80 years.