Tell that to all the pearl-clutching left-leaning voters scared of a fucking AR-15s and continue voting to restrict ownership of firearms based simply on appearance.
If nobody has guns nobody needs guns, pretty simple
I live in Ohio where getting a gun takes thirty minutes and you don’t need a permit to conceal carry. I’m also a clocky trans girl who gets threatened in public…
If it makes you feel better, I’d rather have an estrogen laser, but 9mm anti-personnel rounds will have to dUwU
I completely agree that minority groups in America should arm themselves, it’s unrealistic to think that guns will ever be banned in America, and better safe than sorry.
However, in an ideal world (and most places) nobody would have guns, hence nobody would need a gun.
I agree and am ready to usher in the ideal world as soon as the revolution begins UwU
Not sure how an estrogen laser would work but if it’s anything like it sounds I wouldn’t want to use that on people, seems very unethical.
The existence of an estrogen laser would imply the possibility of a testosterone laser, so if someone didn’t like getting estrogen lasered, they could just go get the t laser fired at them after. A hell of a game of laser tag, that.
Do you change teams on getting hit then? How does this game work?
that would be a good argument if we could get guns out of the hands of the police and such
Key word nobody
If gun rights were actually about that then the black panthers wouldn’t have been surpressed and banned
Anime girl loses a point for not covering the space between her eyes; iirc it’s one of the most important data points for facial recognition.
Maybe she has colored contacts in to confuse facial regognition.
The measurement in question is the distance between tear duct to tear duct, across the nose; which in this case seems to be 3 metres.
remember, gun control started getting stricter and stricter because the black panrher party was arming themselves
when i see multiple posts that are based as fuck and they all happen to be from the same person, it gives me the lemmy warm fuzzies <3
dang you’re cool op
i wish i could find some kinda user-following feature x3 but i don’t think lemmy has it (yet???)
I wouldn’t be surprised if police are jumpier/more trigger happy in the U.S. due to the increased prevalance of guns there. But I also wouldn’t be surprised if it had no effect (anyone could have a gun, after all).
They kill over 50,000 dogs a year. Among The 1000+ (up to 5000) people they kill, half of them are unarmed and not resisting.
A long time ago, another country had a similar problem, the Weimar Republic which was patrolled by Freikorps militias who took and killed what they wanted, and it was better to comply than see a massacre in your village. It’d be from these that the Sturmabteilung and Schutzstaffel would be recruited in the early days of NSDAP.
The second amendment in the US has never been extended to marginalized groups, and when the (successfully
anarcho-capitalistanarcho-communist!) Black Panthers rose in the 1960s to protect black neighborhoods and engage in mutual aid, FBI engaged in an assassination campaign to hunt down and murder its leaders and theorists.Edit: BPP were anarcho-communist, not an-cap. I’m a derp and was typing on mobile. Sorry all.
ETA: Huh. Raccoon doesn’t show strikeout text.
Wait, you’re the first person I see claim that the black panthers were anarcho-capitalist - usually the claim is anarchists. What makes you say that?
The black panthers definitely weren’t anarcho-capitalists.
I agree with the statement. But my vision for a peaceful future isn’t a perpetual Mexican standoff. Nor do I like the idea of political power and representation being directly proportional to one’s intent and capability to do violence.
Also, if owning firearms is a requirement for civic participation, what you’ve really just done is institute a tax that goes directly to gun manufacturers.
While I don’t want there to be a Mexican standoff future, the ability for a minority to protect themselves is insanely valuable. If you look back in American history, being armed was sometimes the reason why minorities were able to continue living.
This is because political power does come from the intent and capabilities of violence. While it’s disgusting to see paramilitary groups like the Klan trying to enforce white supremacy, people are often blind to the state’s use of violence for its own political power. And if the state is enforcing a hierarchical structure that places a minority on the bottom (much less the inherent hierarchy of the state), it’s probably a good idea to arm yourself if you are a minority.
That doesn’t mean we need we need to derive political power from the intent and capability to carry out violence, but as long as there are hierarchies, there will be violence to maintain them. And as long as that violence is aimed at you, being armed is not a bad idea.
my vision for a peaceful future isn’t a perpetual Mexican standoff. Nor do I like the idea of political power and representation being directly proportional to one’s intent and capability to do violence.
The unfortunate reality is that all political power is derived from one’s capability to do violence, whether we want to acknowledge it or not. I pay my taxes because if I don’t the federal government will forcefully take the money from me, or my other possessions. Yeah, arresting someone is “nonviolent” until that person just says “I’d prefer not to.” Forcing someone to pay a fine is nonviolent until they say “I’d prefer not to.”
It’s the only motivator the government or any body of real power has at the end of the day. It’s a bunch of social norms and agreements all backed by the understanding that you will be made to comply by force otherwise.
Lmao, as if oppression knocks on your door. Guns are for poor people, get a lawyer.
I am poor and my neighbors are scary AF 😭
People who own guns are at a much higher risk of suicide. Guns might make you feel safe, but in reality the most likely person to die from your gun is yourself.