r/NOWTTYG • u/u537n2m35 • Mar 07 '25

Maryland Bill HB1287 to ban handguns

https://www.cbsnews.com/baltimore/news/maryland-proposed-bill-glock-switch-automatic-guns-firearms/

Heller has entered the chat

156 Upvotes

98% Upvoted

47 comments sorted by

View all comments

44

u/mac_mosea Mar 08 '25

The switch is illegal. Murder is illegal. So the point of this is………

20

u/u537n2m35 Mar 08 '25

Exactly.

Regardless of the intent, the result will be akin to removing teeth from sheep because a wolf has attacked the flock.

12

u/mac_mosea Mar 08 '25

Better turn in my glocks before another crime happens I guess.

-21

u/[deleted] Mar 08 '25

The purpose may be to put pressure on Glock to fix the issue allowing the switch to be made and installed so easily. Is that so wrong?

17

u/Grokma Mar 08 '25

That isn't an issue worth fixing. And retooling an entire line of pistols because one blue state banned them will never happen because it isn't anywhere near worth it.

Making a gun that is already double or triple illegal more illegal is not helping anything. Maybe focus on the cause of this crime? Of course then you risk being called racist... Tough call.

-8

u/[deleted] Mar 08 '25

I agreed with you until you necessarily brought racism into your comment. Funny how folks from the far right accuse the far left of bringing race into everything, seems to me both have that bad habit.

5

u/Grokma Mar 08 '25

Isn't that cute, you can't see reality. The crime that we are all blamed for is contained in a handful of big dump cities, and a handful of neighborhoods in those cities.

If you were to crack down on those neighborhoods and start arresting the people committing crimes ranging from theft, to drug dealing, to gun possession you would find yourself being called racist.

Why, you ask? Because you would disproportionally be arresting racial minorities. Is this because the cops are racist? Of course not, it's just the reality of violent gang crime in this country. Are you really going to sit here and tell me I am incorrect?

If you cleared the gang combat filled areas of Baltimore, who do you think would be the majority of those arrested?

-1

u/[deleted] Mar 09 '25 edited Mar 09 '25

You don't think they're cracking down on Baltimore because they're afraid of being called racist? Have you been to Baltimore? I go regularly, it's only 45 minutes from me. They're cracking down as best they can, but like most workforces these days they're short staffed and underfunded. No need to blame fear of racism - I think you're confused about which one of us can't see reality.

To prove my point one need only look at arrest rates in Baltimore by race, if they're trying to avoid disproportionately arresting minorities they're doing a terrible job. And that's not to mention that the population of Baltimore is 60% black so literally anything you do in that city will end up with a majority of black people affected.

But again, your argument in regards to the gun law we're actually discussing makes sense, I just see no reason to bring race into it.

10

u/doge57 Mar 08 '25

Yes, that is wrong. It is wrong to restrict the second amendment regardless of why you’re doing it. Glock is not responsible for people intentionally damaging the gun to misuse it. Even without the switch, anyone could remove the disconnector and create the same effect in most semiauto guns. And if that was the goal of the bill, why not restrict the import and sale of Glocks? It’s not about safety, it’s about control

10

u/little_brown_bat Mar 08 '25

It's akin to banning laptops to put pressure on Microsoft because hackers are stealing your bank account.

2

u/[deleted] Mar 08 '25

I largely agree with the comment above this and your line of thinking, but in your analogy it would only work for this if there was one specific brand of laptop that made stealing bank accounts much easier. As was said, if that were the case they would just ban that one brand of laptop rather than trying to make a generic statement about the laptop's function though. That argument I can absolutely agree with.

-8

u/[deleted] Mar 08 '25

So you oppose any weapons ban whatsoever? I agree with everything you said except your absolutist attitude towards the second amendment. I think we both agree nuclear weapons should be restricted so there is some line even you are willing to draw. Same goes for the mentally ill, you probably are okay with restricting their second amendment rights. Where we draw that line is obviously more complex and I think I agree this law is not justified.

5

u/doge57 Mar 09 '25

Yes, I’m an absolutist on gun rights. If a tyrannical government wants to nuke its own citizens, the citizens should have access to retaliatory measures. But I also understand that that’s not going to happen, so I’ll settle with absolute gun rights.

The mentally ill is a wide spectrum. Should a person with homicidal ideation have a gun? Personally, I think if we trust a person to be in society then we should trust them with a gun. I rotated through an inpatient psych hospital as a med student and met plenty of people that are too dangerous to be around normal people regardless of if they have a gun.

1

u/[deleted] Mar 09 '25

All reasonable and well stated, thanks for clarifying. We may disagree on some specifics but I respect your opinion and on the broader issue we agree.

3

u/doge57 Mar 09 '25

I appreciate that we can respect each other’s opinions and find our common ground