this post was submitted on 05 Oct 2023
308 points (95.6% liked)

politics

24740 readers
2257 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 2 years ago
MODERATORS
all 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 137 points 2 years ago (9 children)

Why do we allow so many terrorists to own guns?

If you use a gun to commit a crime, you should lose the right to own guns forever.

[–] [email protected] 39 points 2 years ago (4 children)

Maybe, just Maybe if one of these fucking right wing nuts take out a politician then watch real quick we will get new gun laws. Long as they shooting up schools, and churches and hurting us common folk nothing will change.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 years ago

Only if it's a Republican politician that is not considered a "RINO".

[–] ArcaneSlime 2 points 2 years ago

I mean shit, James Hodgkinson got pretty close.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 years ago (1 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] -2 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 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] 0 points 2 years ago (1 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] -2 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years 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.

[–] [email protected] 29 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Maybe not 100% of the time but at least 80-90% of the time it's always the police, or DA failing to do their job properly. If you're pending a felony trial you cannot own/buy guns until you're proven innocent, and they should be confiscated. I cannot imagine how this man would not be chargeable.

Similar goes for many shootings, they plea down to a lesser charge or the cops just don't do their job and let go obvious crimes.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

Can’t keep your position as a sheriff or DA who are always “tough on crime”. When you start holding right wing gun owners to the law they get upset and won’t vote for you. They’re the ones most punishment-happy and also simultaneously hold themselves above the law, as events over the last several years should obviously indicate.

[–] [email protected] 20 points 2 years ago (3 children)

Which will promptly turn in to

As you can see, the defendant, a biological MAN in a dress, was carrying a pistol in HIS purse when HE tried to invade a women's bathroom to express HIS sick gender delusion. I ask the fine Texans of this jury, would you let this sick MAN rape your daughters at gunpoint?

I'm not making a sophistical argument, they already do this. It's just that they currently focus more on codewords like "thug" to make sure a black man who had three joints in his house can never vote again. If you want gun control, arm every LGBT person in the country and Republicans will ban everything more advanced than a rubber band shooter the very next day, just like how the first sweeping gun control legislation was instituted by then-Governor Reagan to keep the Black Panthers down.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Texas will legalize biracial transgender lesbian atheists before Texas starts actually taking people’s guns away.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Texas takes (usually black) people's guns away all the time, they're not even close to having the most permissive gun laws in the country. As with all things Republicans do, Texan gun culture is massively hypocritical to fulfill a racist double standard.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

I’m not making a sophistical argument, they already do this.

Sadly you're 100% correct. They cling to the bathroom panic even though their arguments have basically no basis whatsoever in reality. Even the "Family Research Council", a religious right-wing think-tank, was only able to find 23 cases of “bathroom incidents” over the span of 18 years - most of which involved cis men, not trans women or even crossdressers, and two cases of discrimination against trans women who were just using the bathroom. Plus in one case a conservative man entered the women's changing room when KIDS were changing to "make a point" about a nondiscrimination law that was recently passed. Everything these creeps claim the left is doing is always just projection.

Meanwhile states that discriminate against trans students have the same rate of sexual assault as other states, and trans teens are much more likely to be victims of assault, especially when they're denied access to facilities that match their identity:

[–] [email protected] 17 points 2 years ago

Why do we allow so many terrorists to own guns?

Gun lobby: "$500 is $500“

[–] [email protected] 6 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Kind of self-explanatory. People who are willing to commit crime with guns also don't care if law forbids them owning one.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Which is why when you pull back the layers, most efforts to curb gun ownership ultimately leads to full confiscation and bans. Restrictions won't do what they want.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

That's not true. Banning felons from having guns allows the police to arrest them before a new crime is committed, because they are breaking the gun possession law. They don't have to wait until the eventual robbery or whatever is in progress.

It also adds another crime to tack on after the fact to get a confession more easily. It's easier to prove that a felon possessed a gun than to examine their intent in a minor robbery (robbery vs assault vs attempted murder).

[–] [email protected] -2 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Felons are already prohibited from firearm posession... and have been for quite some time. Violent offenders are regularly released back into the streets. Not sure what your point is.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 years ago

You said:

Restrictions won't do what they want

I provided some examples of how that gun restriction helps prosecute repeat offenders.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 years ago

Should not even be a right to begin with.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 years ago (1 children)

The trouble with that is you cannot be deprived of rights without due process. You cannot be guilty of committing a crime with a gun without having gone to trial or plead out. It would be highly unlikely to get some law pushed through that survives both NRA opposition/propaganda and the inevitable SCOTUS case.

Bail could be used if they still pose a risk, but that's not entirely the point of bail and would also see heavy opposition.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Due process doesn't mean found guilty in a court of law. If that's what it meant then nobody could be held in jail or in police custody even before their trial. If you are booked for a felony, especially one involving a gun, I believe it's perfectly reasonable to have your guns taken temporarily or permanently if you're found guilty of a felony offense.

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

Only works if a) you are convicted and b) it's a felony charge.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 2 years ago

c) anyone bothers to check

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 60 points 2 years ago (1 children)

More republican terrorists every day.

[–] [email protected] 20 points 2 years ago

Yeah just a normal republican anymore

[–] [email protected] 28 points 2 years ago

Gov. Evers should pull a DeSantis: Put the guy on a plane, fly him down to Florida and dump him there.

[–] [email protected] 18 points 2 years ago

Perhaps, like many, this individual has too much access to firearms.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I read the tldr and thought the guy with the gun was a democrat. I thought it was weird that they took him in and aren't releasing his name. Then I read the article and realized the governor is a democrat and it all makes sense now.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 years ago

A bunch of right wing nutjobs tried to kidnap her a while back too.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 2 years ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 7 points 2 years ago (3 children)

Bulldozer with iron plates welded onto it?

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 years ago

After that? An M1 Abrams. He just wanted to stop by and ask some questions

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

@YoBuckStopsHere
Sure! Or even a stick with a rabid animal on the tip!

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Ancient ninjas used venomous snakes tied to ropes as an assassination tool. They could lower the snake from a rooftop perch onto unsuspecting victims or twirl it around to throw at their victim.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 years ago

@RaoulDook
Modern movies tie Tom Cruise to ropes.

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

KILLDOZER 2: ITS NOT DOZER 'TIL I SAY SO

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 years ago

This is the best summary I could come up with:


MADISON, Wis. (AP) — A man illegally brought a handgun into the Wisconsin Capitol, demanding to see Gov.

Tony Evers, and returned at night with an assault rifle after posting bail, a spokesperson for the state said Thursday.

The man, who was shirtless and had a holstered handgun, approached the governor’s office on the first floor of the Capitol around 2 p.m. Wednesday, state Department of Administration spokesperson Tatyana Warrick said.

The man was taken into custody for openly carrying a firearm in the Capitol, which is against the law, Warrick said.

Madison police reported Thursday that the man, who was not named, was taken into productive custody and taken to the hospital.

Evers, a Democrat, was on a hit list of a gunman suspected of fatally shooting a retired county judge at his Wisconsin home in 2022.


The original article contains 374 words, the summary contains 138 words. Saved 63%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 years ago

The gun violence problem in the US is largely a social problem with a financial upside for some. There is an ongoing financial windfall for gun manufacturers, lobbyist groups, and politicians as efforts against gun violence increase gun owner paranoia, which increases weapons sales, lobbyist organization memberships and donations, and political donations. Until the social problem can be transformed into financial consequences for those who are currently financially benefitting from gun violence or indirectly enabling it, gun violence in the US will never be solved.