this post was submitted on 05 Oct 2023
329 points (95.8% liked)

politics

19126 readers
2295 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. 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:

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.
  4. 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.
  5. 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

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 31 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

Easiest way to kickstart it is arming at-risk minorities.

California's strict gun laws have their roots in white conservatives' reaction to the Black Panthers marching with rifles while St. Reagan was governor of the state.

The upside of this strategy is that if the gun laws don't change, then at least those minorities will have some means of protecting themselves.

[–] [email protected] 26 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

+1, if anyone wants to know why California has such restrictive gun laws those started in response to the Black Panthers policing our cops.

Edit: https://firearmslaw.duke.edu/2020/04/the-black-panthers-nra-ronald-reagan-armed-extremists-and-the-second-amendment/

So, yeah, have black people show up with ARs in some state capitols and you'll kickstart gun control right quick. Arming liberal women, gays and trans people in red states and having them show up at the capitol might work too.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

The down side is that it gives white supremacists the same excuse to execute minorities in the street as the police use.

If guns actually helped oppressed and abused minorities, America would be the safest place in the world for them. Instead, they're routinely hunted by domestic terrorists, almost all of whom are legal gun owners.

The reality is that the gun lobby figured out that you can sell hero fantasies to leftists too.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 1 year ago

The reality is that they already have all the excuse they need.

Personally, I'm not a fan of the side that's perfectly happy with pursuing genocide having the perception that they have a monopoly of violence.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Have you seen the Ahmaud Arbery video? Did you know that the DA of that county is under indictment for trying to bury that case when all 3 defendants were eventually convicted? These monsters don't wait for an excuse, the existence of anyone who isn't a cishet white Christian Republican is their excuse to be violent.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

If Arbery had a gun they'd have 100% been acquitted. Cops regularly point to weapons in the rough vicinity of black men to justify their shootings.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

That's the thing, if Arbery had a gun, it's very likely several of them wouldn't have survived the encounter. Which, as far as racists go, is a very preferable turnout to me.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Sure, and that's a systemic issue that needs solving or it will only get worse as people join specifically to kill and oppress minorities.

But guns are still no solution and anyone promoting them as one is clearly just parroting gun lobby talking points without actually thinking them through.

If Ahmaud Arbery had a gun within 20ft of him, everybody involved would be walking free.

But beyond that, when exactly was he supposed to open fire on police and how do these gun advocates expect that to play out? The moment a minority uses a gun to defend themselves from police, they're as good as dead. The best case scenario is decades in prison.

And if all minorities started doing it? Police executions would skyrocket -- including for unarmed people -- and we'd never see them convicted again.