To get a gun in Japan, first, you have to attend an all-day class and pass a written test, which are held only once per month. You also must take and pass a shooting range class. Then, head over to a hospital for a mental test and drug test (Japan is unusual in that potential gun owners must affirmatively prove their mental fitness), which you’ll file with the police. Finally, pass a rigorous background check for any criminal record or association with criminal or extremist groups, and you will be the proud new owner of your shotgun or air rifle. Just don’t forget to provide police with documentation on the specific location of the gun in your home, as well as the ammo, both of which must be locked and stored separately. And remember to have the police inspect the gun once per year and to re-take the class and exam every three years.

A Land Without Guns: How Japan Has Virtually Eliminated Shooting Deaths (via buttension)

see, that’s gun control
you don’t take away a person’s right to bear arms
you take away a person’s ability to abuse their arms
i mean it’s high maintenance but i really think it’d be worth it if it saves lives  

(via vintagedressesandavocados)

And you make it next to impossible for working class families to obtain firearms, so organized crime can run free with their incestuous relationship with Abe’s government.

You will kill poor people by doing this. Gun crime is committed with illegal guns. The most you’ll ever hope to do by doing this is making the black market flush with liquidity and investment. 

Understand that culturally, Japan is different. They have these deeply engrained cultural concepts that make them, on average, more law abiding. Japan, is also proto-fascist in many respects, with a fucked currency and a judicial system that leaves something to be desired. Take an anthro class if you honestly think laws like this are interchangeable with two entirely different societies. America was founded with the gun. The gun was introduced to Japan. Take the prohibition-helps-organized-crime logic, and just follow it through to it’s end conclusion. 

(via thedoomreport)

I spend about six hours weekly (and weakly) lifting weights at the gym. The modesty of my effort combines with my age (early 50s) to ensure that I’ll never be as buff as younger guys who spend more time at the gym than I do. The result is muscle inequality! And I’m tempted to feel envious. I want to be as bulging-biceped, broad-shouldered, and chiseled as are my young gym-rat friends.

Really, though, how seriously do I want this outcome? I could build more muscle if I spent not six hours weekly at the gym but, rather, six hours daily. But I choose not to do so. Spending more time at the gym means spending less time working (that is, earning income), less time with family and friends, and less time doing other things that I judge to be worthwhile. The fact that I’d be more buff if being more buff were costless is irrelevant. It’s not costless; therefore, the size of my muscles is largely the result of the way I choose to make trade-offs.

So I resist the temptation to envy men with bigger muscles (men whose muscles, do note, were not built with fiber taken from my muscles). And if muscle redistribution by government were possible, I’d oppose it. Not only would the result be less muscle bulk to ‘redistribute’ (Would you pump weights for hours each day knowing that a large chunk of what you build will be stripped away and given to someone else?) but, more importantly, I’m not entitled to the confiscated fruits of other people’s efforts.

Don Boudreaux on muscle inequality (via laliberty)

^^^^^^ This is so on the money

(via stuff-that-irks-me)