For human rights all simple - all people must have possibility to protect their rights to life, liberty and property, and in real life, mister Colt is best friend of adequate citizen.
So limitations on civil guns are limitations of people rights.
It is adequate to limit rights on guns for felons and for incapable persons, these are only exceptions.
Comments
Real problem is that this is political question.
For human rights all simple - all people must have possibility to protect their rights to life, liberty and property, and in real life, mister Colt is best friend of adequate citizen. So limitations on civil guns are limitations of people rights.
It is adequate to limit rights on guns for felons and for incapable persons, these are only exceptions.
Incapable people demand automatic self firing self ranging self targeting weapons now!
If self driving cars are ok, surely no one can object to self programming terminator bots, it’s using lisp macros so surely HN loves it eh?
We can train it on Fox News. What could possibly go wrong?
Do it. Now such tech not exist, so nonsense demand it.
No, it is not. Now does not exist any machine with self cognition, and all self-targeting weapons considered as objects, not subjects.
If you will create self cognitios machine, this discussion will have sense, but before - non sense.
How do you feel about personal MLRS’s? Short range is sufficient but why limit peoples civil rights so severely.
The people demand pocket ICBMs now. Anything less is tyranny.
Your text is spam. You spent community resources on spam. This is offense in many countries.
So next time try to create something valuable.