Hacker News Reader

Comment by senthilnayagam | Hacker News Reader

there are lot of people who hoard good domains, wanted a .com domain which tells the intent. I would have very well called gun safe tracker, but I am not building a tracker for it.

I would like to get ninja blocks, they look interesting

banning high capacity magazines can reduce the fatalities, but even that is tough to achieve

it is a matter of time there is going to be another shooting somewhere, and we will again discuss and forget it, we have blood in our veins not just water, hope we can make some progress

View on HN

I think you are missing his point. The term "assault weapons" is a made up term. It describes a series of cosmetic features on a rifle, and if a rifle has a sufficient number of those features, it becomes an "assault weapon". The gun community, the people who you would need in order to buy your weapons, is not going to like that name. Since most of your potential buyers aren't going to like the idea itself, you might as well come up with a website name that they are going to find blatantly offensive.

most people will not wear a seat belts while driving a car if it was not mandated. same applies to air bags, they are not effective if seat belts are not worn.

http://www.nsc.org/safety_road/DriverSafety/Pages/SeatBelts....

here is the link to seat belt legislation and compliance

though the first seat belts came in Saab, volvo and mercedes in late 50's early 60's it took 80s to get them as a law in US

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seat_belt_legislation_in_the_Un...

The usage of Seat belts for every state is between 72.2%(New Hampshire) to 97.6%(oregon)

if we can achieve those numbers some day Americans will feel more like Canadians

> banning high capacity magazines can reduce the fatalities, but even that is tough to achieve

The colombine shooter that fired the most, used 10rd magazines, not the one with the TEC-9. Src: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Columbine_High_School_massacre#...

I will give you props though, unlike most of the anti-gun crowd, you're thinking something other than 'ban'.

if we start with the "ban" as the idea it will take another year atleast to bring it to vote, and democrats are not majority, so the day we start announcing lot more people will start buying everything of the shelf. NRA knows how to twist people to listen to their own version of the truth.

even when the ban if it comes it would be for "manufacturing and sales of guns" just like 18th amendment for banning alcohol, it would do nothing to keep the existing guns in safety.

so my thinking is safety of the guns by owners without involving guns and and restrictions of guns in public places by involving people, organisations and if needed the government, this would be a compromise which republicans and democrats can agree on.

If you pass a ban, you'll have something around a 10% compliance rate. Then, you accept it, or you move to confiscation. Clearly you are not steeped in the non-coastal, non-liberal-elite culture, because if you were, you would realize that would trigger a LOT of blood shed.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com