- cross-posted to:
- liberalgunowners@lemmy.world
- cross-posted to:
- liberalgunowners@lemmy.world
You must log in or # to comment.
Yeah you’re right, instead I should trust that the police will use restraint, arrive instantly, and do the right thing 🤡
A dog is much better protection than a gun.
Dogs get shot.
Life isn’t a video game.
Ask a real world security professional and they’ll tell you to get a dog.
A gun salesman will tell you that if you buy a gun you automatically become Annie Oakley
I think we’re talking two different things. I’m not saying to buy a giant handgun and wait for robbers to come into your house so you can blast them away.
I’ve known people who fantasize about that. They are gross.
What I’m saying is that the police in the United States have a history of shooting dogs, so they do absolutely nothing for you anti-fascist security. They would absolutely help against theft and robbery because most robbers want to be quick and quiet. Police don’t care.
But so a gun doesn’t help either. It just means they call SWAT and take you down with superior numbers and firepower, doesn’t it?
The only real place where a gun helps is in an actual civil war, or possibly against a single non-governmental bad guy (with risk of being shot yourself as well).
I have a dog. I’m also surrounded by fascists in the deep south. I’m keeping guns because I’d rather live than die for some abstract moral point you’re trying to make about how we should live in a fantasy land where people in fascists states don’t need guns.
deleted by creator
No they will fucking not.
Ask a real world security professional and they’ll tell you to get a dog.
I am a (former) real world security professional.
And I’ll say that a gun is much easier to carry around with you than a dog.
I taught my gun to walk, now I don’t have to carry it anymore :D
Good boy!
deleted by creator
Look up MOVE.
Philadelphia police bombed a house in the middle of the city.
If it comes to an armed conflict, I really doubt that the folks who couldn’t get Bernie nominated are going to win a firefight.
Stop living in videogame land.
deleted by creator
Nothing your wrote makes me think you could handle an actual gunfight.
We don’t know that. It might be, and unfortunately I think who ever is playing has gotten bored.
deleted by creator
By that logic, a gun won’t either. Many gun owners are shot by police. If you shoot back at an unlawful entrance, they just bring more. They don’t really care. Power disparity is too great already.
This fight is won elsewhere.
deleted by creator
The fight was lost in the Supreme Court. 42 USC §1988 was explicitly set up to grant civil rights attorneys fees if they won their claim (and it costs a lot to prosecute a civil rights claim). But lawyers and firms would accept winnable civil rights cases on the basis that they would eventually get paid. That came to a halt in 2001 in 532 US 598, decided on May 2001, which talked about the rights of the “prevailing party” to be paid. In function, it killed civil rights litigation.
Buckhannon Board & Care Home, Inc. v. West Virginia Department of Health & Human Resources https://www.oyez.org/cases/2000/99-1848
The police shooting people because they have or might have guns is a clear violation of the 2nd amendment right to carry. (ACLU never got involved because they don’t take 2nd amendment cases).
But here’s the thing. Cops don’t arrest right wing armed protesters. Why do you think that is? Cops are willing to shoot unarmed protesters in wheelchairs, but fail to move on a fat out of shape protestor with an AR-15. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2012/sep/25/protests-houston-police-shoot-unarmed-man-wheelchair
“Winning” requires multiple fronts, from civil resistance and disobedience, to openly carrying protests, to voting, to boycotts, to lawsuits, to just simply speaking out when something isn’t right. And proposing alternative solutions.
But here’s the thing. Cops don’t arrest right wing armed protesters. Why do you think that is?
Oh I know exactly why that is.
Against random criminals, not occupying forces with an itchy trigger finger.
Good thing Alex Pretti was armed. Oh wait.
If only he had a dog with him…
Yeah the dog thing is silly too.
An organized and effective political movement is what will protect us, not weapons.
An organized and effective political movement with weapons.
I don’t see how the weapons will be useful honestly. Iran has a very well armed military and they’re almost totally powerless before the US military. Military conflict is perhaps the singular thing fascists are best at. I’d rather attack my enemies where they are weak instead of where they are strong.
I mean I’m not opposed to people being armed but it really should be viewed as a last resort to hurt your enemies as much as possible before you’re totally wiped out rather than a realistic path to political change.
A claw hammer would be a better option than a gun. Why does everyone assume that a gun would be the best thing to defend yourself with in all situations.
Ok you bring a claw hammer and I’ll bring a rifle we’ll test your theory out
Think to yourself for two seconds why a gun would be better for self-defense than a hammer.
deleted by creator
“Oh no, now everything looks like a nail! Guess it’s Hammer Time.”
Are we shooting eachother across a field or are you invading my house?
What advantage does a hammer have over a gun in a moment of self-defense?
I can grab it at a moments notice as it can safely be left out, you don’t have to load it or aim it so using it is fast and simple. If its my home they’re invading I know where to hide. I trust my ability to swing and hit someone in a panic far more than I do my ability to handle a gun under the same pressure. Its just going to be easier and more reliable to hit someones head with a hammer than it will be to shoot them.
Unlike you, I actually train with my gun so we have very different concerns when under pressure. Mine relate more to not getting killed to make some kind of moral stand about how guns are bad in all contexts.
it can safely be left out
Honestly, I wouldn’t leave hammers lying around where kids could get to them any more than guns. The hammer will be less deadly, sure, but a dumb kid will still cause a lot of damage with it.
you don’t have to load it
True
or aim it
False, lol. You out there protecting yourself with unaimed hammer swings?
I trust my ability to swing and hit someone in a panic far more than I do my ability to handle a gun under the same pressure.
Skill issue. Requires training time.
The only advantage I agree with is the ability to leave a hammer out versus a gun, and that’s only in cases of having small children at home. If your gun is for self-defense, it would make more sense to keep it loaded and easily accessible.
I have to say it’s a very strange stance to prefer to defend yourself within arm’s reach of an assailant versus at a distance. I think you’re also giving yourself a lot of credit when you say you’d be more confident swinging a hammer with enough accuracy and strength to incapacitate someone while panicking. Better hope you get them in one swing.
Unless you’re fighting nails, a claw hammer is not not the best thing to defend yourself with in any situation.
Cops love to shoot dogs.
Elaborate.
I know that the second a gun is brought into a house the members of the household are significantly more likely to be shot. I believe it’s because of the number of gun related suicides as well as the risk of a negligent discharge.
This is true, but in a vacuum in a life-threatening situation a gun is better than a dog for defending yourself. And also does not require you to intentionally put an innocent creature in harm’s way. And also does not require nearly as much upkeep as a dog.
But you are correct, the presence of a gun does statically increase your risk of being shot. And that is something worth considering.
Edit: and furthermore if you buy a guard dog, your risk of being mauled by a dog will likewise go up.
Even chihuahua?
They’re smaller and harder to hit.
Smaller hitbox. Fair argument.
They distract the invaders while I load my crossbow.
¿Por que no los dos?
You white and rich? Then yeah. You black and poor? Then FUCK no.
Conservatives want guns to protect themselves from a bunch of DEI boogymen that don’t exist. The left is buying guns to protect themselves from the boogymen that are currently publicly stripping away/violating their rights while doing multiple genocides.
Trying to act like the two groups are the same makes you either a boldfaced liar or an idiot. But hey, at least you get to be smugly superior with your snappy little meme.
Get to feel smugly superior. Because they certainly aren’t.
deleted by creator
Armed minorities are harder to suppress.
deleted by creator
If a racist, bigoted group doesn’t want you to have a thing… you should probably consider having that thing.
A lot of people on Lemmy would call you a turbolib for saying something so radical
What? No they won’t. I have never seen anyone being accused of being a liberal for being pro-gun around here.
I’m talking about the other thing conservatives want to take away from minorities
What? Rights? Representation? Not ringing any bells.
Starts with a V, many Lemmy users don’t want to have one…
Varicose veins?
deleted by creator
I agree, and they get so mad when a leftist actually does something to try and improve the world
deleted by creator
Ha, I just recently wrote a blog post about the fact that communicating effectively with your vote is a skill, you might like it
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
No no. You do it for the statistics.
When the black panthers started getting guns, they got gun reform laws up real quick.
Now imagine every LGBTetc individual getting a gun, it shows up in the Republican Excel sheets. They start getting scared and invent new laws to make it harder.
If/When you buy the gun, you disassemble it and store it in a certified gun safe. This way when they storm your apartment and kill your because “you had a gun” it’s a fuck lot harder for them to plant a gun on you.
“I have some qualms shooting people.” Aka “just as bad as Maga” Lol you need to go have your brain checked, it don’t work so good.
deleted by creator
Take your own advice you twerp.
Okay. Governor Reagan
Don’t buy a gun because it’ll make you feel safe. Buy a gun to piss off OP.
deleted by creator
Under no pretext should arms and ammunition be surrendered. Any attempt to disarm the workers must be frustrated, by force if necessary.
It’s not going to make you safer. Best you can hope for is to take some of the motherfuckers with you when they come for you.
If you take enough of them then everyone is safer.
There’s a lot more of us than there are of them.
If even 10% of us take one of them down with us, they’ll run out of door-kickers very quickly.
(Even more so because a lot of their door-kickers are cowards and would quickly abandon the fight if they thought they were actually in danger.)
I’m okay with that.
deleted by creator
Liberals never want leftists owning guns cause when liberals send Pinkertons to murder us they don’t want us fighting back.
You sound like a liberal wanting rights nshit
Saying “liberals” is incorrect. NEO-liberal is the correct word. Liberal progressives/socialists are not the same thing.
I didnt think feeling safe was why liberals where buying guns. I thought it was to make oppressors and aggressors feel less safe.
deleted by creator
Guns are literally an oppressive force. The second amendment people are ready to kill those who try to stop ICE or change the government in a way they don’t like. Their threat is literally murder, but sure more guns will solve this problem.
“The second amendment people” are the oppressive force. The guns are tools used by said force to oppress.
Semantics. There are more guns in the US than people in the US. Guns are an oppressive force themselves in these extreme circumstances.
No different than having land mines all over at this point. People die needlessly due to proliferation thus creating an oppressive force without 2nd amendment gun nutters.
People aren’t claiming that they love guns, or gun violence. The point is that gun reform is dead for the foreseeable future. And since we are all forced to live in a society with gun proliferation, it makes sense that fascist shouldn’t be the only ones with guns.
Yeah, this is just learned helplessness wrapped up in a pretty bow.
What makes sense is dealing with the problem. We can’t regulate guns, but we can regulate bathrooms!?
Yeah, I am not buying it. Also, people are claiming they love guns and plenty love war as well. My daughter’s coworkers had a spirited conversation about how we should just rip off the bandaid and invade Canada and Mexico.
Clearly there is something wrong with our society and the proliferation of guns is just another symptom that needs to be managed as you would any disease.
Yeah, this is just learned helplessness wrapped up in a pretty bow.
Lol, arming yourself against fascist is totally learned helplessness…
I just think you are either delusional, in denial, or completely ignorant of the state of current affairs in the US, if you think we have any chance of gun reform with the current supreme court.
What makes sense is dealing with the problem. We can’t regulate guns, but we can regulate bathrooms!?
The people who want to protect fun laws currently hold the Senate, the House, and the Supreme Court which also have a very conservative interpretation of the constituonal amendment that protects firearms. They are also the same people who want to regulate bathrooms.
How do you suppose we enact firearms regulations?
Also, people are claiming they love guns and plenty love war as well. My daughter’s coworkers had a spirited conversation about how we should just rip off the bandaid and invade Canada and Mexico.
I was talking about the people in this current forum…
Clearly there is something wrong with our society and the proliferation of guns is just another symptom that needs to be managed as you would any disease.
Yeah… No shit. There are literallly fascist running the government.
I would love to live in a society where I don’t have to think about gun violence, that would be rad. It’s just clearly not the society we currently inhabit, and ignoring that fact does not make you any safer.
You might have the privilege of living in a more civil part of the country. I on the other hand am in an interracial marriage in the most violent and racist state in the union. So excuse me if I teach my friends and family how to defend themselves and build a mutual defence network among other minorities and the queer community.
Pretending you are not engaging in learned helpless is pretty silly as it is obvious you are. Clearly you don’t understand what is really going on, and that is okay. Fascism is not new, not even a little bit.
There are so many good solutions to our issues and the fact that you haven’t even spent time thinking about them is very telling. Instead you are a reactionary. Guns will never make our society safer, if they did we would be the safest society in the world already.
I have seen the damage gun culture does to the minority and queer community. The needless deaths and violence. Pushed by those who are mentally ill professing perverse defense fantasies created by the marketing department of gun manufacturers.
Just another fascist cog doing exactly what your are supposed to.
I’m sure a politely worded letter will work this time
I am sure more guns will solve your made-up problems with the added bonus of getting more innocent people killed.
made up
Yeah that tells me everything I need to know about you. Fuck off Nazi.
Is that what fascists call people who don’t like to see innocents die? Go satiated your bloodlust somewhere else.
Feeling safe isn’t the point of having guns.
The point is to make your oppressors feel unsafe.
Idk…venison is a good reason too.
Yeah, but then I have to take part in the killing instead of passively benefiting from it :(
deleted by creator
Marx said the proletariat must never be disarmed.
To be fair, Marx also said that the savages in Africa needed to be tamed by European influence.
That’s interesting. Where did you read that?
It’s the “Noble savage” thing. Fairly common at the time but inherently racist.
Kinda like GW owning slaves. Context of the time
deleted by creator
I think ICE might behave differently around a crowd of protesters open carrying with body armor
deleted by creator
Get some proper militias up in that
Really a question of whether you still trust the state apparatus to protect you and your loved ones from physical violence. For the right, the need to protect themselves was never anything but a bogeyman dreamt up by gun manufacturers and racist opportunists. The calculus may well differ for other folks given the current state of things and the lessons one might draw from history.
Indeed.
I was going to say that in a country where the rule of law is practised I wouldn’t feel inclined to own a firearm and I would argue no one else should.
On the other hand, watching how the US is on cusps of going full fascist, rounding up leftists, socialists, LGBTQ and people of all ethnicities, well fuck I would be arming the fuck up. I would be going full prepper. Shit I would be digging going full VC and digging tunnels in my back yard.
