908
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 12 Sep 2023
908 points (98.7% liked)
News
23622 readers
3015 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
We all have to sit back and let cops do this because they have the power and the military-grade weaponry. What the fuck can we do to stop them?
Well I suppose we could start by abiding by the tender suggestion of a certain document and not let them be the only ones with weapons.
Why do you gun humping morons slide this stupid shit into every fucking conversation?
Was this woman supposed to have whipped out her ar and start blasting the cop car racing towards her?
+1
Why is the solution to police having guns, more guns?
Maybe less guns is the answer?
Maybe?
How.
You really can't think of anything.
There have been solutions proposed to tighten gun restrictions or just simply to reduce the issue for decades.
There are examples of entire countries where this shit already works.
Honestly at this point saying just "how" is uninformed or disingenuous.
I'm all for licensing and registration, that isn't however reducing the total number.
Yes, in general much smaller countries with a much different culture and the fun one, fascistic countries.
It isn't, there isn't a workable solution proposed at the moment, it's insanely complex and simply saying "maybe fewer" is the answer is uninformed or disingenuous.
So get to work on forcing those cops to give up their guns already.
I guess the myriad of countries around the world that have heavy gun restrictions and no gun problems aren't example enough?
No theres just nothing that can be done about americas gun problems. Nothing...
Well if the cops are keeping their guns, then the citizens certainly shall retain that right as well. It is our right anyway, and I'm glad we have that freedom.
Y'all are just going to have to get over your hysterical idea that "getting rid of the guns" is a realistic option. It's just a simple-minded fantasy due to the fact that our rights are iron-clad, and the millions of unregistered guns in private hands would never be relinquished whether they were banned or not.
I'm not afraid of gun violence, because I can read and understand statistics well enough to comprehend that it's not a danger significant enough to worry about. It's not even in the top 10 most common causes of death in the USA. I enjoy a life of general contentment and peace in the USA, doing pretty much whatever the fuck I want on a daily basis, and it is pretty wonderful.
Police have guns in other countries and dont go around shooting people that arent criminals and for no reason. Seems the problem isnt so much the guns but the types or people that are becoming police and the way they are trained. You think there cant be any change because you wont see its affect immediately. It will take time. But it can happen.
Also saying its not even the top 10 cause of death is a bit dumb. So even thought it will help reduce death its not worth dealing with because more people die of other things. Sure.
Sure, but that's like comparing dropping a needle and dropping a grand piano on someone's head. Its not a problem in most other countries where only the police have guns. Its... you know... rare... And taken seriously...
Oh! So we agree, police shouldnt be able to be judge judy and executioner when they suspect some poor black guy just casually sitting in his car?
The thing is that they dont need to label you anything to shoot you in the states, they just do it anyway. Until they are up against someone shooting up a school, then they just stand there and let the public deal with it...
Don't german police have to account for wssentially every bullet fired? While US cops are imitating die-hard?
No it's not dumb at all, it's quite relevant to the context in which I used that information, which is not the context in which you are framing it. You're making up a fake argument by using my words out of context in other words.
I said that because it's my reason for not being worried about it. It's not a danger worth being worried about because it is statistically unlikely to happen to most people.
Separate from that, I stated support for our 2A rights and verbally shat upon the idea of gun bans, because it is not logistically possible to remove them from society in the USA.
It's funny how you quoted me there and claimed i took what you said out of context and reframed it, but did the exact same thing to me by not including any of the context. Bit hypocritical...
You dont need to be worried about being shot to accept that school shootings, mass shootings, or any shootings that are done unjustly as a direct result of lax gun laws are a problem. Sure, YOU might not get shot, but it is happening in places it shouldn't be, so you should be concerned about it.
Is it that easy for you to ignore all the death? all the kids that die in schools? all the families that suffer tragedy? Just because "hur dur mA riGhTs!" The constitution was written in 1791. It was written within the context of the time, but i guess that's another thing you are happy to take out of context because it suits you, huh?
The right to bear arms allowed you to carry a fucking flintlock pistol. You aren't shooting up a fucking school with a musket when you have to load each round individually between shots.
If the founding fathers had the type of weaponry you could get today that ammendment would look VERY different.
You can pretend all you want. And i know you will.
But go ahead and tell me ive taken you out of context when you a clearly happy to do the same whenever it suits you.
Yes, actually it is pretty easy to ignore all that. It's a tiny drop in the bucket compared to the overall population. Far less than the number of people dying in accidents, which is the #4 leading cause of death in the USA. But if you watch the news, that's all they focus on because it gets eyes on their content. The boring reality that the vast majority of us experience, living in safety without encountering violence, is not able to capture anyone's attention to drive ad revenue. Usually whenever there's a newsworthy shooting, the investigations lead to mountains of red flags that the perpetrator had shown prior and the police and community around them just let it go until tragedy struck. So I wonder why those people failed their community, more than I wonder about the "evil guns" that caused it.
And back to your lame Constitution-time argument, it's worth noting that there were fully-automatic machine guns and semi-automatic rifles in use by the military at the time the Constitution was written. They were fully aware of the technology of repeating small arms, and intended for the bearing of such arms to be the right of the common man.
More people die from accidents that no one aaw coming than from firearms, so we better not do anything about firearms... thats you. That's what you sound like.
As for the automatic weapons
Heres the first link i found, and it explicitly states it wasn't used for war and doesn't match the modern definition of a machine gun https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Puckle_gun
Everything else seems to be nothing like a modern machine gun.
Pretend thry had the same types of weaponry we had all you want but you are chatting absolute shit.
Nope, everything I said was accurate and you're wrong and dumb. Haha, gotem
Good one....
refer you to "what the fuck can we do to stop them?" from the original post, then.
refer you to "So get to work on forcing those cops to give up their guns already" from my comment that you replied to, then.
The "I am rubber you are glue" defense doesn't work here.
You: "Force cops to give up their guns"
Me: "How?"
You: "Force cops to give up their guns"
Are you trying to say essentially there's no path forward except the fascist militarization of law enforcement at the sacrifice of all (other than 2A) Constitutional liberty?
No
So, what do we do?
Nothing she could have done, but as the old saying goes: "can't corner the Dorner!"
Read the original comment again but very, very slowly.
Also, the same can be said for anti-gun people as well. I don't even talk about guns on here anymore because every time you mention them, you have a bunch of snobs from both sides looking to start a big ass fight over shit totally unrelated to the topic.
Have you ever actually applied any real world logic to this fantasy scenario of yours? It ends up with you extremely and irrevocably dead.
It's not even the being dead part. Ask yourself, "Is this the society you want? Is this how it should function?"
When forced to interact with them, do you give more respect to flies or wasps?
How exactly do you expect us to get military-grade hardware?
The fuckin' Army Surplus store dude. The local gun store. Here in America, we have access to it all.
Do we? I don't see too many APCs available for sale.
Here you go: http://www.exarmyvehicles.com/
That website offers APCs and other tank-like vehicles for sale, with international shipping offered. See their Logistics section for options.
If that's not a good option, you could always buy a Dodge monster truck like the small dick men of the USA often drive, then pay a welder to add armor plating surrounding the vulnerable areas. 1-inch steel plate should stop most small arms fire.
And how many people who need this sort of thing to fight back against police will be able to afford them and then figure out how to use them properly and then use them in a fight with the police and survive?
Very few, if we've been paying attention. Which protests/riots had more cops willing to shoot at those involved? The heavily armed 'marches' that we've seen, or the large crowds of unarmed individuals? Sure, some of that may have been because of bias from the police, but I guarantee most of it was because they were afraid of starting a shooting when there was the possibility of being shot back at.
Afghanis had no issues
Unless you count the 200,000 who died.
I mean, they DID go against almost every country around them and the US military.
That part is so obvious as to go unsaid
Yeah well they had the CIA on their side and we don't