Why liberals, people of color and LGBTQ Americans say they're buying guns (www.npr.org)

submitted 1 month ago by Curmuffin@fedia.io to c/politics@lemmy.world

153 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Since Trump's election, gun groups catering to progressives and people of color report a surge in interest as they look to defend themselves in a country that, to them, feels increasingly unstable.

(page 2) 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[-] DarkFuture@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Lifelong anti-gun libtard here.

I've been doing my research and talking to friends with guns so I can begin the process of arming myself.

Fascism is here and I passed my history classes. I know where this is going. It's time to make sure you, and everyone you know, is armed to the teeth.

If things keep escalating, which they will, because that's what fascists do, then there will come a day when they attempt to prevent anyone who registered/voted Democrat from purchasing firearms.

Buy them. Now.

load more comments (1 replies)

[-] peaceful_world_view@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

Ah the illusion of safety.

[-] PhilipTheBucket@piefed.social 0 points 1 month ago

I really thought about this last year, took the class and everything. In the end I decided not to get one. My reasoning is this: Having a gun and not a lot of experience in what to do with it is like playing a board game for life-and-death stakes that you have never played before.

Maybe I will regret at some point in the future, but I had trouble coming up with scenarios where I wound up thinking "Thank God I pulled my gun out, now all my problems are resolved."

[-] warm@kbin.earth 0 points 1 month ago

It's not like its going to help anyway. If you defend yourself from the crazies, ICE, whatever, you are just going to get shot anyway by someone else. They want that excuse. Being armed only really matters if a civil war breaks out. Its a crazy dynamic, which is why guns should be banned in the first place.

[-] mean_bean279@lemmy.world 0 points 1 month ago

Yeah I’m pretty confident the people killed in the holocaust would disagree.

[-] warm@kbin.earth 0 points 1 month ago

What kind of bat shit crazy analogy is that? ...but I'm pretty confident the people killed in the holocaust would rather guns never existed.

[-] mean_bean279@lemmy.world 0 points 1 month ago

Guns aren’t really what killed people in the holocaust. They would rather the fascist and ideology never existed.

Also, you know we dropped in guns to freedom fighters behind Nazi lines. It’s not a crazy analogy, you’re just stupid.

load more comments (1 replies)

load more comments (7 replies)

[-] lemmy_outta_here@lemmy.world 0 points 1 month ago

I fervently hate Trump, his cronies, and his supporters. However, buying guns is a laughable response to a serious threat.

Maybe you buy a 9mm. Maybe you buy an AR15. The US government has stealth fucking bombers. Tanks. Fighter jets. Satellites. ICBMs. Your pea-shooter is fucking useless against a government that has decided its own people are the enemy. Trump is in the midst of authorizing the military to fire on civilians. Do you think he is going to specify that they use commercially-available firearms just to keep things fair?

You know what is not useless? General strikes. Civil disobedience. Protests. Boycotts. Journalism. Do you want to hurt Trump? Sell your stocks before the bubble bursts. Don't shop. Cancel your phone and read a newspaper. Call in sick. Organize. Collaborate. Help each other. Bring the economy to a screeching halt and the billionaires who put Trump in the white house will put his ashes in a shoebox in about 10 days.

load more comments (4 replies)

[-] YeahIgotskills2@lemmy.world 0 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

America's relationship with guns is darkly fascinating for those of us in other 'western' countries. The cliche of the right-wing gun-nut is seemingly way off the mark. You guys have absolutely normalised gun ownership. It's deeply entrenched in your culture and is married to civil liberty in a way that is alien to most other developed nations.

It seems that the state tempering gun ownership is widely viewed as an intrusive and sinister overreach, whereas for us allowing everyday people to own assault rifles etc would be viewed as a dangerous dereliction of duty by the government.

I totally get the appeal of firearms. We go "clay pigeon shooting" where I lived in the UK. It's fun. But the idea that the average citizen could legally own a gun is wild to us.

[-] SCmSTR@lemmy.blahaj.zone 0 points 1 month ago

As an American, I'm curious why you think civilians owning modern rifles made for war is wrong.

And before you respond, I want to make clear that I am intentionally loading the question to try to dissect the topic openly, without bias. Think of me as a free thinker, somebody who is open minded, possibly naive.

I want to know truly what your reasoning is, and if it can stand up to my values and understanding, and vice versa.

[-] masterspace@lemmy.ca 0 points 1 month ago

Guns are the number one cause of death for American children, after automobiles, and America already has a higher automobile death rate than virtually all it's comparable peers.

Since 1999, 400,000 American children have died needlessly.

[-] SCmSTR@lemmy.blahaj.zone 0 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

If you remove all guns, there will still be a thing that is number one.

Same with automobiles. "Needlessly" is extremely undefined. Lots of things occur that are needless or claimed to be needless.

Also what's with that seemingly arbitrary year? Why 1999? Is that the year that the Columbine shooting happened? Guns were around before then. Why did school shootings suddenly become popular then? DID school shootings become more popular then? Can we reverse that change?

[-] masterspace@lemmy.ca 0 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

If you remove all guns, there will still be a thing that is number one.

The children who are not gunned down will not be killed by something else. It just lowers the overall death rate.

"Needlessly" is extremely undefined. Lots of things occur that are needless or claimed to be needless.

No it's not. It's defined in relation to the child death rates of peer countries.

https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamapediatrics/fullarticle/2820614

load more comments (2 replies)

[-] SupraMario@lemmy.world 0 points 1 month ago

No it is not. That number was an outlier during covid. It's back to car accidents. On top of that, the stats in the child deaths include 15-19 year olds, most of which are from gang shootings, not random 5 year olds being shot.

The way the anti-gun groups do numbers is specifically designed to make people think that toddlers are being killed every 2 seconds. More children drown every year in pools than by gun deaths, yet no one is screaming to outlaw pools. At the end of the day, most don't care that kids are dying. They care how they die.

[-] masterspace@lemmy.ca 0 points 1 month ago

On top of that, the stats in the child deaths include 15-19 year olds, most of which are from gang shootings, not random 5 year olds being shot.

Yeah. So?

More children drown every year in pools than by gun deaths, yet no one is screaming to outlaw pools.

I do not understand why gun nuts cannot fathom the difference between something that has utility and can result in death, and something that serves no function other than being a point and click murder machine.

[-] SupraMario@lemmy.world 0 points 1 month ago

Yeah. So?

And there it is, the same disingenuous that the right uses for thier bullshit causes.

I do not understand why gun nuts cannot fathom the difference between something that has utility and can result in death, and something that serves no function other than being a point and click murder machine.

A pool has no use, you cannot use it for defense or putting food on the table. A firearm is a utility that has purpose. Fascist are literally snatching people up off the streets and you're still arguing why no one should have firearms.

[-] masterspace@lemmy.ca 0 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

And there it is, the same disingenuous that the right uses for thier bullshit causes.

It's not disingenuous in any way shape or form.

You have basically said that children killed in gang shootings don't matter. Try not to throw right wing shade around when you're parroting their racist talking points about which people do and don't matter.

A pool has no use, you cannot use it for defense or putting food on the table.

Lmao, bruh, it's this niche little exercise called swimming, you might have heard of it. Try and pull your head out of your ass before pointing us to all the examples you have where ICE has been stopped by people with guns.

load more comments (6 replies)

load more comments (2 replies)

[-] GaryGhost@lemmy.world 0 points 1 month ago

I've decided on a shotgun. With buckshot you don't have to aim, you get multiple shots, it's inexpensive and you can hit multiple targets in unarmored areas. It's just for home defense, I'm not sure if we should be carrying outside. We have to be careful though, life is worth saving not shooting.

load more comments (3 replies)

load more comments

this post was submitted on 29 Oct 2025

22 points (95.8% liked)

politics

26774 readers

845 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! 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.
No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

• Register To Vote

• Citizenship Resource Center

• Congressional Awards Program

• Federal Government Agencies

• Library of Congress Legislative Resources

• The White House

• U.S. House of Representatives

• U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

• News