• Pilferjinx@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      Is it the right call? What was the reason for the denial? Bump stocks are a work around to automatic laws isn’t it?

      • skyspydude1@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        The problem is the laws regulating automatics are absolutely idiotic, and automatic weapons are 100% legal to own, just kind of expensive. Not like “need to be a multi-millionaire” expensive, but “can afford to pay cash for a late-model used car”.

        Like most of our half-assed regulations, it doesn’t actually do anything other than making it pay to play. We don’t actually want to do anything that might prevent cops and their buddies from having a monopoly on force, so basically every gun law is moot for them anyway, even if they’re buying them as private citizens.

        That’s one of the biggest concerns I have with the way we regulate firearms (among many other things) in the US, because they clearly aren’t made with a mindset of “X thing is bad for society as a whole, we need to do something about it”, it’s "X thing is totally fine if you’re in our special club, but the plebs are not allowed to have it.

        • trafficnab@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          Being “anti-gun” is almost universally actually just being “pro-gun-but-only-for-the-state” when you sit down and analyze it

          When the police and army disarm themselves, then we’ll talk

  • secretlyaddictedtolinux@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    the right to bear arms exists to protect people from tyrants

    the whole premise of this right is that we can’t trust the government to keep our liberty safe because they could become the tyrants. if one day some religious idiot comes into power who doesn’t want women learning math, you may end up glad that conservatives have made it easier for women to fight for their liberty by refusing to allow these rights to be eroded

    • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      the right to bear arms exists to protect people from tyrants

      Don’t you have that backwards? Gun ownership is a luxury enjoyed by an enfranchised society enjoyed exclusively by people who don’t feel threatened?

      Because I remember a whole era of us domestic policy that revolved around targeting POC and other marginalized groups with gun regulation, while letting white nationalist groups run rampant.

      Gun rights strike me as a political fiction. You only really get to enjoy them if you’re not threatened by over-policing. As soon as you start asserting those rights against a government bureaucrat, they vanish.

    • jorp@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      Conservatives would be the first to call anyone participating in the uprising unamerican and would be more likely to form reactionary militias supportive of the fascist government than to overthrow anything

      • secretlyaddictedtolinux@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        Hadis Najafi was a feminist. A world hero. I hope one day in a brave new feminist world, she has a holiday. I wish I had met her. I’d give anything to have met her. I don’t believe in an afterlife, but if heaven were real I would get to meet her. How can one person be so courageous?

        She fought without being armed because she was a hero and she couldn’t not fight. She had enough and said fuck it, I know I’m going to die and don’t care. Although she said “I like to think that when I think about this a few years later I’ll be pleased I joined the protest” I believe a part of her new she could die, I think this was something she said to comfort herself. Heroes fight even when the odds aren’t great. I wish I could become a good and courageous person like her.

        You think it’s bad now?

        Don’t be myopic. This is a woman who would have been a hero with our without weapons, but she could have done more if she had the right to bare arms.

        Yes, it matters and the NRA matters and feminism matters and the solution is making sure women have more and larger guns and better tactical training.

    • Godnroc@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      I agree with the first part. It was supposed to be a check and balance to government power and oppression. It gives people the power to fight back against injustice.

      However, in the time of intercontinental missiles, planes, tanks, and remote operated drones, are a bunch of peasants with guns actually going to do anything if the government turned on its people? Does the “right to bear arms” not extend to other, non-gun weapons?

        • Hugh_Jeggs@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          Gun owners are literally the most cowardly people on the planet

          Yous are scared of your own fucking shadows

          “Whatcha scared of, coward?” “Uh, just other cowards is all” 😂

          • Voran@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 months ago

            I don’t own a gun. I’m from a country where it’s not an option. To assume makes an ASS out of u and me.

            Your point is bullshit. Not all people are good. Rapists exist. Serial killers exist. I’d like some options if I ever ran into one.

            • secretlyaddictedtolinux@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              2 months ago

              yes, only people with the luxury of owning guns could not understand the terror of being unarmed

              just because conservatives fight for a right doesn’t mean it’s bad. this is the 1 thing conservatives are right about

              the problem is liberals don’t take this as opportunity to promote more female gun ownership and tactical training. a society of armed women is a society of women who will learn math and possess their own bodies

            • secretlyaddictedtolinux@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              2 months ago

              Imagine a world in which men could not own guns…

              But women and intersex persons were given as many guns as they wanted for free.

              What would it be like?

              Probably better.

          • ikidd@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 months ago

            Taliban or not, the peasants made it impossible for both Russia and the US to hold for any period of time using a pretty ancient rifle.

              • ikidd@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                2 months ago

                Well, of course it wasn’t just the rifle. But my point was that low-tech armaments (and terrain to an extent) didn’t make it a walk in the park no matter how high-tech your military. You still have to hold it.

    • barsquid@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      Religious tyrants have gotten into power, they are forcing women into service as incubators. Nobody sane has taken up arms against the government. It is the “conservatives” who are fighting at the ballot box to erode our liberties and human rights.

      “Conservatives” want to elect an openly racist demagogue who already committed a putsch and is asking SCOTUS to hand him a Long Knife.

      LOL “conservatives” refusing to allow rights to be eroded. Yeah buddy, the women are going to force their way into math class holding the teacher at gunpoint.

    • cum@lemmy.cafe
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      Bro thinks meal team six is going to stop the government lol. They are already taking our liberties. Why didn’t guns save us during banning abortion? Why are guns not helping us defend our freedom of speech? Do you think some random authoritarian fucks are legitimately willing to fight the government over political differences? What liberties have they not taken already, or that they cannot take? If in some unrealistic scenario where the boomers won a small fight in some small town, do you think the government would just let them be? Do you not think the authoritarian fucks would use their guns to defend the government vs fight against it? They already use their votes to suppress our liberties, I have no doubt they’d choose to use their guns too.

    • BorgDrone@lemmy.one
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      the right to bear arms exists to protect people from tyrants

      And yet, it’s the would-be tyrants who are armed to the teeth.

      • secretlyaddictedtolinux@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        this is why more young feminists need to support gun ownership and learn how to use weapons

        women should be able to choose what they want to wear, the type of weapons they want to own, and what to do with their bodies

        the NRA needs to stop being thought of as conservative and liberals need to embrace the NRA

        • cum@lemmy.cafe
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          Why are you insisting we turn everything into an active war zone

            • BorgDrone@lemmy.one
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              2 months ago

              Nice theory, but owning a gun makes you less safe, not more. You are way more likely to be hurt by your own gun than successfully using it to defend yourself.

    • Jimmyeatsausage@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      I’ll remind my daughter next time she calls me having a panic attack during an active shooter lockdown that at least she still has the right to love who she wants make her own reproductive healthcare choices get IVF if she can’t have kids be open and honest about who she is

    • Furbag@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      2 months ago

      the right to bear arms exists to protect people from tyrants

      This is a complete fiction, a true American mythology that exists in the modern day.

      The right to bear arms was more about homestead defense against indigenous natives and foreign invading armies than it was for any kind of poison pill for Americans to topple their own government if they woke up one day and decided they don’t like who’s in charge anymore. The very notion that the founders would set up a new system of governance but be okay with the idea of baking in gun ownership rights to ensure that the people will always be able to conduct a violent insurrection as the vehicle for regime change is absurd.

      Everybody likes to ignore the “well-regulated militia” part of that amendment, conveniently ignoring that a well regulated militia would answer to the state or the federal government, the very force of tyranny that they claim they need the guns to defend themselves against.

    • modus@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      Because many of their rich friends own pre-86 MGs that would immediately lose thousands of dollars in value if they became less restricted. And because machine-gun ranges would lose their business model.

  • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    “The ban was imposed by the Trump administration”

    But please, gun enthusiasts, tell me again about how Biden is going to take away all of your guns any day now whereas Trump is 2A all the way.