|
|
Post by letsnotshooteachothe on Jul 13, 2024 21:38:11 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Peregrine on Jul 13, 2024 21:55:13 GMT -5
Post with your main, coward.
|
|
|
|
Post by Peregrine on Jul 14, 2024 1:35:28 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Disciple of Fate on Jul 14, 2024 2:37:06 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Peregrine on Jul 14, 2024 3:25:20 GMT -5
What a lovely opinion piece that failed to mention that saint Trump often advocates for violence and shooting his political opponents, declared he wants to be dictator for a day and has indeed removed many LGBTQ protections his admin could get their hands on. He himself normalized this working out of the highest office. But oh the humanity, oh the meanie left! If only they wouldn't be so dishonest!
Yep, I suspect a lot of the outrage over people celebrating the idea of Trump dying is that they're filling their diapers (just like their idol!) at the sudden realization that their cult doesn't have a monopoly on guns and, unlike Trump, they don't have secret service protection. And so we see a bunch of desperate pearl clutching and tone policing about the topic of political violence, as if they wouldn't have been celebrating Biden being assassinated and gleefully praying for Harris to be next so their lunatic becomes president.
Also, let's not forget the January 6th riot with MAGA cultists calling for Trump's own VP to be hanged for treason because he didn't overturn the election and put Trump into power.
|
|
|
|
Post by semipotentwalrus on Jul 14, 2024 4:26:10 GMT -5
I also love that this person claimed it somehow started when Trump was elected, cause he must have missed all those people hanging puppets of Obama. The entire point of the Second Amendment existing is for people to be able to do this kind of thing. This is what "resisting tyranny" looks like in real life; it doesn't matter if you or I agree with the shooter, the US constitution has placed the right to decide whether a politician should be shot or not in the hands of everyone. The US is partially founded on the idea that this is fine. "The tree of liberty[...]" and all that. It's been with the US since the start. |
|
|
|
Post by Disciple of Fate on Jul 14, 2024 4:33:24 GMT -5
True, but it has been a few decades since anyone got this close with their 'watering' attempt.
|
|
|
|
Post by Peregrine on Jul 14, 2024 4:35:28 GMT -5
The entire point of the Second Amendment existing is for people to be able to do this kind of thing. This is what "resisting tyranny" looks like in real life; it doesn't matter if you or I agree with the shooter, the US constitution has placed the right to decide whether a politician should be shot or not in the hands of everyone. There's a reason why I think the second amendment is bonkers. This is that reason. Is it better for the would-be tyrant to have a monopoly on violence and no reason to fear their victims? For the only response to oppression to be praying for the tyrant to have a change of heart and step down?
|
|
|
|
Post by semipotentwalrus on Jul 14, 2024 5:34:21 GMT -5
The entire point of the Second Amendment existing is for people to be able to do this kind of thing. This is what "resisting tyranny" looks like in real life; it doesn't matter if you or I agree with the shooter, the US constitution has placed the right to decide whether a politician should be shot or not in the hands of everyone. There's a reason why I think the second amendment is bonkers. This is that reason. Is it better for the would-be tyrant to have a monopoly on violence and no reason to fear their victims? For the only response to oppression to be praying for the tyrant to have a change of heart and step down?
It's not a dichotomy between the two. The US wouldn't have won the Revolutionary War without France running interference in Europe. The availability of guns is a far lesser concern than organization and having friend on the outside to back you against the tyrant. The latter two gets you guns, but having guns won't get you outside support or give you capable organizers. |
|
|
|
Post by Peregrine on Jul 14, 2024 5:43:01 GMT -5
It's not a dichotomy between the two. The US wouldn't have won the Revolutionary War without France running interference in Europe. The availability of guns is a far lesser concern than organization and having friend on the outside to back you against the tyrant. The latter two gets you guns, but having guns won't get you outside support or give you capable organizers. OTOH imagine how much better off we might have been if one of the 1930s attempts to assassinate Hitler had succeeded. |
|
|
|
Post by Disciple of Fate on Jul 14, 2024 5:53:41 GMT -5
The availability of weapons and the spread of paramilitaries in the Weimar Republic were a contributing factor for Hitler coming to power.
Cracking down harder might have never created the need for assassination. There are a lot of necessary steps in between, were a warranted intervention could have stopped that trajectory. But the US isn't doing much better than Weimar Germany.
|
|
|
|
Post by semipotentwalrus on Jul 14, 2024 6:47:39 GMT -5
It's not a dichotomy between the two. The US wouldn't have won the Revolutionary War without France running interference in Europe. The availability of guns is a far lesser concern than organization and having friend on the outside to back you against the tyrant. The latter two gets you guns, but having guns won't get you outside support or give you capable organizers. OTOH imagine how much better off we might have been if one of the 1930s attempts to assassinate Hitler had succeeded. Imagine how much worse off we'd have been if someone competent took the reins. We can do these hypotheticals all day. |
|
|
|
Post by A Town Called Malus on Jul 14, 2024 13:43:42 GMT -5
I also love that this person claimed it somehow started when Trump was elected, cause he must have missed all those people hanging puppets of Obama. The entire point of the Second Amendment existing is for people to be able to do this kind of thing. This is what "resisting tyranny" looks like in real life; it doesn't matter if you or I agree with the shooter, the US constitution has placed the right to decide whether a politician should be shot or not in the hands of everyone. The US is partially founded on the idea that this is fine. "The tree of liberty[...]" and all that. It's been with the US since the start. This. The people who argue that the second amendment is needed to resist and prevent tyranny seem to overlook the fact that what is defined as tyranny is left up to whatever the individual with a gun thinks it is. There's no universal definition of tyranny that is woven into the fabric of the universe that we all are innately aware of, it is a sociological construct that is interpreted vastly differently between individuals. Just look at what Sovereign Citizens regard as tyranny, and then think what would happen if they decided to fight it with firearms rather than nonsensical legal battles. Where every video of them arguing with a police officer that they were "travelling, not driving" ended with them pulling a gun and opening fire. |
|
|
|
Post by herzlos on Jul 14, 2024 14:07:57 GMT -5
You could argue that it would be up to the "well regulated" militia to determine what was tyranny, which I'd have said meant that it was a committee thing of at least township level. But since "well regulated" militia in the 2A actually means any citizen with a working gun, then I think you're right. The 2A supports anyone deciding to shoot a tyrant, which Trump definitely is.
How that fits with murder being a crime I'm not sure. I guess it'd be no different than a stand your ground defense.
(Not that I'm condoning the attempt, I think he's best left alone and this will only fuel things worse, but from a Constitutional basis it's fine).
|
|
|
|
Post by adurot on Jul 14, 2024 16:33:46 GMT -5
It’s just horrible – so surprising to see it here. But we have to get over it. We have to move forward.
|
|
