Hacker News Reader

Comment by bastardoperator | Hacker News Reader

What law is that? Not the supreme law of the land aka the second amendment. The irony is right there, do you see it?

You mean the law that the NRA tries to protect and defend? The only irony is that you admit there's a law, a supreme law of the land, but seem to take a biased approach saying there shouldn't be guns. Sadly, they arn't in a position to argue with the secret service, and thus it's only when someone under secret service protection is speaking.

If you donate more to the NRA, they'll have more resources to defend the second amendment.

I think the NRA convention should have unlimited guns all throughout the convention. The actual irony is that the Secret Service knows weapons aren't safe and will happily enact policies, not laws, at a convention that is designed to promote 2A freedoms while completely trampling on those rights all because they're protecting an individual who apparently has greater rights to not be around your guns.

That's their view on it, and i'm glad we agree that it's not the right one and is unconstitutional. If you actually look at gun related homicide statistics, you'll find that certain demographics are that of European levels, while others are that of third world. There's something called availability bias that people can have, and I think you'll find at a NRA convention, or in most of the country, with regular demographics, you are just as likely to be murdered with a weapon as you are in Europe.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com