by kozak6 » Mon Aug 28, 2006 1:15 am
The shotgun is mostly for shooting at junk out in the desert, trap shooting (at clay pigeons, which are small biodegradable flying discs), and possibly hunting.
It's a poor choice for crime or self defense. It only holds 4 rounds, and the barrel alone is 30 inches long (which works out to 76.2 cm). It's too long for hallway manuevers. The effective range is also poor when compared to other guns, and it is slow to reload.
Interestingly enough, shotguns often are preferred for home defense, but shorter ones that hold more shells are preferred. At very close range, shotguns are very effective, and the spread is nowhere near as much as you'd think.
As for Ed's differences:
Environment-
Lobbyists have tremendous political influence.
Gun laws-
Gun laws actually vary tremendously by state. In some states, it's incredibly difficult to purchase a firearm. Expensive permits, expensive classes, stringent storage requirements, expensive taxes, many banned categories of guns, and other things.
In my state, much less so. In states with less gun laws, it is a result of sort of a "frontier mentality" sort of thing, I think.
The main reason we don't have more federal weapon laws is mostly due to the current crop of politicians, I think. Most gun laws are passed at the state level. On the federal level, not so much. Many anti-gun politicians are overamibitious. They try to ban handguns or so called "assault weapons" and at a national level, it just doesn't go through.
In some of the more rural states, guns are also more of a part of life. Bullets are cheaper than buying meat at the grocery store, and owning firearms isn't considered unusual.
As for religion, could you go into more detail? Do you mean the opposition to gay)) marriage, abortion, and evolution? Or something else?
Units of measure-
The things is, they are very widely established. Screws, bolts, tools, hardware, machinery, roadsigns, everything. It would be extremely time consuming and expensive to switch over, and the public reaction to it would be mostly negative. And then, the old standards will still be present in everything from before the switch. It might happen eventually, but it will take a long time before it is even seriously considered.
The metric system is much easier to use. I'll admit it. It's true. We are taught it in school for all of our science classes.
Seatbelts? Paper sizes? No idea what you are talking about.
Cars? What about them? The gas guzzling monsters? Or percieved inferiority? I hate Fords too, you know. My brother has an old Ford Taurus, and it's terrible in every way. Poorly designed, and poorly built. It's a real piece of junk. If the rest of Ford's line is anything like the Taurus, it's amazing they are still in business. I don't know anything about Chevy, GMC, or the rest of them, but I don't plan on ever owning a Ford.
Gas was also previously much cheaper, so fuel inefficiency wasn't seen as a problem. I remember a time when I was a child, where gas was less than $1 USD per gallon (about 4 liters to a gallon). The gas guzzling monsters were also popular because the massive size and weight also helps protect you in accidents. It's important, you see, if you like to talk on your cell phone while driving.
Immigration? About 10% of Mexico's population is now living in the US, or at least that is what we are told. Also, it's very complicated because some powerful people want to keep their cheap cheap labor, while others want to give illegal immigrants rights, and while others want to simply kick them out. Mostly, though, it also makes for a wonderful distraction from the war in Iraq.
1.2.1 Forever