Anyolduser

Raytheon has been making a few improvements since the 70's, like getting rid of the bullets.

https://www.rtx.com/raytheon/what-we-do/integrated-air-and-missile-defense/lasers

Fits on a pickup truck.

https://www.rtx.com/raytheon/what-we-do/integrated-air-and-missile-defense/lasers

That's why Raytheon developed a laser based anti-drone system. Electricity is cheaper than bullets.

There are enormous downsides including mechanical reliability and weight.

Raytheon is already selling a system that assists a human operator in drone targeting, then knocks them out with a laser emitter. The whole thing fits on the back of a Polaris off-road vehicle and runs on electricity. That means the ammo is a gallon or two of fuel.

We've had that technology since the 70's, it's called the Phalanx system and it automatically defends naval vessels against incoming missiles.

To do this the Phalanx fires 4,500 rounds per minute. While it only has to fire for 1-3 seconds per incoming object, that's still an ungodly number of rounds, each one about the length of your hand.

To do the same with a human operated firearm would take such a degree of luck that you may as well pray for the incoming drone to get struck by lightning.

Looking at things pragmatically widespread education of the population takes time and simply won't take for some people. There are folks today complaining that "they don't teach taxes in school". These people have a problem filling out a 1040EZ. Not exactly encouraging.

At the same time Tic Tok represents a single vector for current or potential foreign propaganda and intelligence gathering targeting the American public. Opportunities to nip a single bud (so to speak) are few and far between and probably won't be possible in the near future.

TL;DR - The "sell or ban" is a short term measure that won't take a lot of time, education is a long term measure that takes years.

Go figure, all it took was scripts that aren't dog shit and directors not trying to "fix it in post" all the time.

It would have cost you nothing to not make this.

Well, there's a whole string of words I've never seen next to each other.

It's not because it's more convenient for us, it's because it's better for the long term health of the herd and the species.

During times when no hunting licenses are sold (there are only so many wealthy hunters) the preserve rangers have to cull the older males themselves. If they don't the older males will kill younger males to try to defend females they can no longer breed with. Elephants die either way, but fewer (and older ones) die with controlled hunting.

It's also worth remembering that nature is fucking brutal. The ways most herbivores die are by starving, succumbing to disease, or being eaten alive. Getting shot through the heart is the best way to go for an old bull elephant.

Ignoring any of the (very complicated) issues around human/elephant interactions there's a strictly ecological reason for limited hunting.

Herds have an issue where males past breeding age still try to edge out younger males. These older males can be destructive and violent and it's better for the health of the herd if they're out of the picture when they can't breed anymore.

Those are the elephants that hunting licences are issued for.

Hmmm methinks a good faith discussion will not be found here...