all 97 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 128 points 9 months ago* (1 child)

The US Attorney basically said no gun carry in Washington DC.

TLDR-

This syndrome reached an apotheosis of sorts when Jeanine Pirro, best known as a reality TV judge and right-wing blowhard, and now (because of course!) appointed by Trump as U.S. attorney for the District of Columbia, issued this edict: if anyone brings “a gun into the District, you mark my words, you’re going to jail. I don’t care if you have a license in another district and I don’t care if you’re a law-abiding gun owner somewhere else.”

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 172 points 9 months ago (35 children)

    « Harris will comes for your guns » -MAGA

  • source
  • hideshow 35 child comments
  • [–] 50 points 9 months ago (26 children)

    I thought that was hilarious given that she is known to carry and be proficient with a pistol, and Trump has never held a gun in his life.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 26 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 9 months ago (25 children)

    The issue is that the dems won't drop their gun control rhetoric, even with a huge portion of their base becoming armed and fascist literally killing people. I don't give a shit that Harris own or fired a gun. I give a shit that they've not woken up to the realization that gun owners aren't just maga chodes larping as nazis. They need to drop the anti-gun shit and actually focus on what needs to be done to correct our move towards full blown dictatorship.

    I've said it a million times. Dems would sweep elections and destroy the GOP if they dropped their anti-2a bullshit.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 25 child comments
  • [–] 27 points 9 months ago (4 children)

    Isn't the reason the 2a is so sacred is to be a check on the kind of authoritarian take over already in progress ? All those school kids were murdered so that access to firearms could continue to be unhindered so something could be done to correct your move towards full blown dictatorship?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 9 months ago (3 children)

    The fascist are the ones who are heavily armed. On top of that, we're not at the start a civil war yet. We're at the ballot box right now, midterms will determine if we move to the next box.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 13 points 9 months ago (1 child)

    I'm sorry, gonna call bullshit here on the last election.

    The D candidate and running mate were gun owners and comfortable owning and using guns. The R candidate when he was President literally said "Take the guns first, go through due process second,"

    YET when that's discussed, somehow it's (D)ifferent to the gun owners. The "Gun grabbing democrats" won't stop but Trump saying that but not going through was fine.

    So when coworkers are suddenly now worried he might be coming for their guns my response is just call me Cassandra because I saw it coming and here we are!

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 8 points 9 months ago

    https://www.everytown.org/press/what-does-freedom-from-gun-violence-mean-for-kamala-harris/

    What are you even arguing here? AWB is one of the top things she platformed on for gun laws. Same for ERPOs and UBC(which requires a registery).

    I don't know if you're assuming I'm defending the turnip in power right now or not, but my point has been that dems are for more gun control and for banning a lot of firearms that are in common use, because they have no clue about firearms.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 12 points 9 months ago (5 children)

    What dem has come out and said they want to take away 2a? The vast majority of dem proposed gun regulations are not anti 2a. Gun regulation isn't anti 2a

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 9 months ago (4 children)

    Gun regulations are anti-2a, almost all gun regulations will not curb our violence or gun deaths in this country. Almost all gun regulations are designed to limit the access of minorities and oppressed groups to arm themselves.

    https://fee.org/articles/lawmakers-in-hawaii-propose-repealing-second-amendment/

    It takes half a second of googling to pull up links like this. Yes it's not a platform they run on but to act like that's not the end goal of a ton of dems is being naive at best and willfully lying at worse. The Democratic party's end goal is to make it so, basically the rich are all that own firearms in the end.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 9 months ago (3 children)

    The actual proposal to Congress in that article reads...

    "adopt a proposed amendment to the United States Constitution pursuant to article V of the United States Constitution to clarify the constitutional right to bear arms."

    That's not removing 2a. The comment of repealing was just that, a comment. That specific comment didn't make it to the official request to Congress.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] -4 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (2 children)

    Really...you do realize that amending it is just an easier way to basically say it's null and void.

    On top of that, you asked I provided. Let's stop pretending that there aren't dems who want it repealed.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 9 months ago (1 child)

    Since when does amending ANYTHING mean removing it?

    You didn't provide anything, the linked article didn't support your claim.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 9 months ago

    Since when does amending ANYTHING mean removing it?

    Lol, the 21st voids the 18th...open a damn history book for once kid.

    You didn't provide anything, the linked article didn't support your claim.

    I literally did, you just don't like that there are elected dems who want to ban civilians from owning firearms. All so you can continue the bullshit from the DNC "we don't want to take your guns".

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 9 months ago*

    Not just gun control, if democrats became populist they would sweep elections. We pay more money for less service in a great many areas, and we didn't use to. Call out those gatekeepers that have taken from our shares, in our lifetimes, and promise to bring it back to us. It's that simple.

    The establishment was chosen to kill popular reform, not enact it. The only way forward is replacing them, and they are as secure as ever as they've convinced the sheep it's the voters' fault for not electing the most unpopular candidate they could find that offered zero reform in a time of anger while the republicans ran as reform.

    I'm not helping the establishment democrats, it's a waste of time, we need new leaders, fighting under these leaders is giving up.

  • source
  • parent
  • [+] -12 points 9 months ago (8 children)

    Who are you going to shoot to bring our democracy back, Rambo?

    The 2nd should be repealed. Kids getting murdered in school isn't a fair price to pay so that gun fetishists can indulge their fantasies.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 15 points 9 months ago (7 children)

    And this is the exact shit I'm talking about. Your whataboutism doesn't negate anything I'm saying. It just furthers people who are single issue voters into the hands of the maga chodes because they're saying "no we're not going to take the guns" while you spout shit like "repeal the 2nd".

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 9 months ago (6 children)

    What's the point of having the 2nd amendment if it leads to kids being killed, but it's not used to stop the fascists taking over the country?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 9 months ago (5 children)

    You know more children die drowning in pools each year than have been killed via school shootings in the last 10 years combined? Let's stop acting like the reason you want the firearms gone is because of the kids.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 9 months ago (4 children)

    Yes but pools are fun and give exercise. Gun ownership is useless (since they're no being used now against their main purported purpose).

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 9 months ago (3 children)

    I have a lot of fun going to the range and putting holes in paper. Way more fun than I have soaking in a soup of little kid urine and dead bugs in the pool.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 9 months ago (2 children)

    Mmm dead bugs and kid piss soup. Actually I think most drownings are in private pools that aren't really like that. But I don't think anyone cares about guns kept at the range. It's the general availability that means the mentally unhealthy can easily get them and that leads to problems. And it's not the just the numbers of kids killed at schools, it's the knowledge that this happens regularly, the live shooter drills they all have to experience. It's traumatizing for a lot of kids.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 9 months ago (1 child)

    The issue here is you're wanting to take the guns, vs figuring out why it's a recent thing that kids are shooting up schools.

    Those live shooter drills are pointless. It's the same shit from the cold war. They do nothing to protect the kids, just as you said, traumatizes them.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 0 points 9 months ago

    It's not just kids doing the shooting. It's to do with deteriorating mental health, poor social connectedness, availability of guns, and more media reporting.
    Well the shooter drills might help. Did you know that when the j6 rioters stormed the capital buildings, the interns immediately got people to go into offices; shut, lock and barricade doors, turn off lights and hide out of sight of any windows or doors. They did this because they'd got the practice in school.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 91 points 9 months ago* (3 children)

    I'm pro 2A and a lot of my 2A buddies knew damn well Harris wasn't coming after our guns because she was just going to continue what Biden was doing which was pretty much nothing.

    Trump on the other hand has repeatedly lied about his stance on 2A, moved to ban accessories and certain firearms and at one point the ATF had the longest wait times under his first admin. The wait times are nearly non-existent but there are some who argue that is thanks to Biden.

    And for those who claim that the "Gun Personality" people voted for Trump, I can tell you from first hand experience those gun nuts did not vote for Trump. It was the faux 2A who go to the range for a photoshoot and buy the Gucci gear who voted for Trump.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 47 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

    One abiding characteristic of the right-wing personality is that when he is not dominating others, he feels persecuted. That explains LaPierre’s outbursts in the 1990s just as it explains the lies that Trump, Kristi Noem, Stephen Miller, et al., require to rationalize their abandonment of a conservative shibboleth now that they are in power.

    They all live behind military walls is another abiding characteristic.

  • source
  • [–] 70 points 9 months ago

    Every republican accusation has always been a confession. Their base will parrot whatever talking point they’re given with dead eyes

  • source
  • [–] 65 points 9 months ago (2 children)

    My dad has been saying that the Republicans were going to be the ones taking guns when people go on about "gun grabbing democrats" since Reagan apparently. I was only long enough to hear him say that around Bush era onward but this is my shocked face that he was right.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 9 months ago

    I fully agree with your father and I've been saying the same thing since the 2001 Patriot Act and when the Orange Kool-Aid guzzlers won in 2016. Those fucks will eventually abolish 2A for the full power grab.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 60 points 9 months ago

    Historically every major piece of gun legislation has come from Republicans

  • source
  • [–] 40 points 9 months ago (5 children)

    https://www.politico.com/news/2026/02/03/jeanine-pirro-second-amendment-washington-00762347

    It happened a few days ago and she walked the comments back within 24 hours, apparently.

    John Commerford, executive director of the National Rifle Association’s legislative arm, said Pirro’s remarks “highlight the need for Congress to pass H.R. 38, the National Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act.” That bill, introduced last year by Rep. Richard Hudson (R-N.C.), would allow anyone with a state-issued concealed carry license to carry a firearm in any other state.

    The cynic in me says it’s staged to drum up support for this deranged bill.

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 19 points 9 months ago (2 children)

    That bill, introduced last year by Rep. Richard Hudson (R-N.C.), would allow anyone with a state-issued concealed carry license to carry a firearm in any other state.

    While I think laws on concealed carry being more consistent across states would be a good thing, this is a terrible idea. Laws across states aren't consistent--one state may require some sort of education, for example, while another does not. The one that requires education obviously shouldn't be recognizing a CCL from a state that doesn't.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 9 months ago* (1 child)

    The compromise would be that a certain minimum standard Would be required and if it states Concealed carry per meets that standard then it would be recognized Everywhere and if Is too loose then other states could freely deny reciprocity, states would probably have the federally compliant version and this in-state only version, or just get rid of the end State only version leading to de facto Federal standards for concealed carry comma probably set to equal that of California or New Jersey or something So that they have no reason to complain

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 9 months ago

    A better idea would be to arrest every state legislature who passed constitutional violating laws about guns and throw them in jail, much like should have been done for the violation of the civil-rights act. If there are no consequences for states passing unconstitutional laws, then what is the purpose of the constitution in the first place?

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 46 points 9 months ago (4 children)

    This is a deeply misleading headline

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 9 months ago

    I kind of agree. The headline makes it sound like the second ammendment has formally been abolished. In reality, it's just being ignored. If ICE can kill people for carrying guns, then in practice the second ammendment might as well be abolished

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
    [–] 32 points 9 months ago (5 children)

    Amending the constitution requires a super majority... Not a deranged despot.

    He doesn't get to decide which parts of the Constitution are in force or not.

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 36 points 9 months ago

    Yes he does, because you're not fucking doing anything about it. You can say "That's illegal!" like it's a magic spell all you want, but Trump doesn't care what is legal. Either you go stop him, physically, or he will keep doing whatever he feels like.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 9 months ago

    At the executive level, he gets to decide how the federal policing departments interpret statute and execute their department objectives.

    In the modern era, that means taking a reading of "gun possession" as "physical threat to police" and permitting the police to respond to anyone they think might be carrying with lethal force. That's not a repeal of the 2nd amendment in a literal sense. But it does make open carrying extremely dangerous in practice.

    Of course, this isn't news to everyone.

    Being a Black gun owner in the US comes with a unique set of challenges. The Second Amendment is often not applied to Black gun owners in the same way it is applied to white gun owners. Lawfully armed Black people are often viewed as a threat and met with police violence, in part because of implicit bias that law enforcement is not immune to.

    Philando Castille was a registered gun owner in St. Paul, Minnesota, who was shot and killed by police in front of his girlfriend and her daughter, after disclosing that he was armed. Alton Sterling, who was killed by police officers in Baton Rouge, Louisiana, was legally armed at the time of his death. Black Americans are disproportionately murdered or injured by police and Black gun owners describe being stereotyped and misperceived by law enforcement.

    What we have is a white population that's catching up to the treatment enjoyed by minorities for decades.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 44 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (6 children)

    For the MAGAs keeping score at home:

    • America First, no foreign entanglements. Yeah, tell it to Venezuela, Greenland, Iran, Gaza, Canada, Mexico, etc.

    • Lower Prices on Day One - Still rising on Day 365

    • Release the Epstein Files - except the really good stuff of course. Unless it exposes the nasty "victims," who were just slutty 13 year olds.

    • Protect the 2nd Amendment, unless, y'know, you want to actually carry your gun the way the Constitution and SCOTUS allows. Can't be doing that. Soon they'll just take them away, but it will be okay if MAGA does it, right?

    So with all your precious MAGA promises being broken, why are you still in? The open corruption? The open treason? The virtuosic incompetence? The paramilitary Death Squads murdering innocent American citizens in spontaneous firing squads? The humiliating daily court losses for their all important retaliatory prosecutions? The embarrassing public statements multiple times a day? The frenzied hours long manic posting of racist memes? The shitting his pants during press conferences?

    I'll bet it's the Pedophilia. The one thing that MAGA can be absolutely counted on is to cover for Pedophilia. Hiding it is LITERALLY their most important job, and they are ALL on board with that objective

    That's why ALL MAGAs are Pedophiles.

  • source
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 9 months ago (3 children)

    Here in Canada we have three major parties and a few minor ones. A decade or more ago ago our three major parties could be described as progressive, centerist, and conservative. These days they can be referree to as progressive, conservative/center-right, and far-right.

    How many people do you suppose switched from the Conservitives to the Liberals, from the originally conservative to the now conservative/center-right, in more recent years as the parties changed their alignment and began representing different people? Next to fucking no one. Most originally Conservative voters, if they genuinely believed in what they were saying, should be voting Liberal right now as that party now aligns with their supposed views more closely. Liberals, likewise, only care about voting for the party that puts itself between the two options on either side, calling anyone to the right or left “extreme” or “idealists” no matter what their positions actually are and so it’s difficult to get them to actually make real change.

    The moral of this story is that MAGA voters are voting based on following their tribe around and they are completely locked into branding and stereotypes. They believe anything they’re told because they want to align themselves with an image, not vote for a representative. The more this shit goes on the more I think the world needs to ban the idea of political parties so that voters have to actually listen to the campaign promises of candidates.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 9 months ago

    Some cities have non-partisan elections for offices like mayor. It seems like that would be a good thing, but it's really because some cities are so partisan, it can be hard to come up with a candidate from the opposing party. By making it non-partisan, they can offer more than one candidate, even if they are both from the same party.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 9 months ago

    That will most likely be the evolution. Parties just divide people. Sure it is a way to unite but they are too deeply entrenched in the worst ways

    We definitely to give what you said a go everywhere

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 30 points 9 months ago

    Well, the headline is an outright lie, not just misleading. But the point about the Democrats not screeching about this from every corner is a good one.

  • source
  • [–] 13 points 9 months ago (1 child)

    He doesn't have the power to abolish 2a, he just has the ability to tell his DOJ to not investigate matters when his administration's agents violate it. This constitutes a massive abuse of executive power, fostering a culture of impunity and abuse but we all should understand that if and when executive and legislative power fall out of the hands of this admin, these sorts of crime have very long statutes of limitations and accountability (if belated) is entirely in the cards

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 15 points 9 months ago

    FYI - nothing happened

  • source
  • [–] 14 points 9 months ago

    The Right Wing are remaining loyal to their only real value: loyalty and obedience to authority

  • source
  • [–] 18 points 9 months ago (11 children)

    Except he didn't.

    MAGA have gun rights. The rest do not.

  • source
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 9 months ago (2 children)

    Wrong, we all do. All you have to do is go make the purchase and be armed.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (1 child)

    Except Trump's DOJ is not blind and just, they openly serve MAGA. They will let you buy guns but if you should end up in court over a shooting, you won't win unless you're MAGA.

    If a judge rules against Trump's wishes, he attacks them openly and moves to have them removed and replaced with a loyalist.

    If you're in a state that sides against Trump he threatens to freeze federals funds.

    It is the same for the 1st amendment and other such rights. It's how this whole debate has returned.

    They want people to feel their rights are still in place so people remain obedient but the DOJ and SCOTUS have been weaponized.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 9 months ago (6 children)

    The rights are inalienable, not a special privilege granted by a government.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 9 months ago (4 children)

    But that is exactly what rights are. Given to people by government and they can be taken away.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 9 months ago* (2 children)

    You are mistaken, that is not what rights are or what the constitution says ("God-given, inalienable rights").

    If you let the government take them, that's on you, but I guess it depends on how far the individual is willing to go in order to protect said rights.

    If the government does something that is contrary to your rights, that's them violating the rights, but they do not have the ability to rob you of your free will: You choose your actions, words, and what you are or are not willing to risk sacrificing to foil attempts to curtail those rights.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 9 months ago (1 child)

    This George Carlin quote comes to mind:

    Now, if you think you do have rights, I have one last assignment for ya. Next time you're at the computer get on the Internet, go to Wikipedia. When you get to Wikipedia, in the search field for Wikipedia, i want to type in, "Japanese-Americans 1942" and you'll find out all about your precious fucking rights. Alright. You know about it.

    In 1942 there were 110,000 Japanese-American citizens, in good standing, law abiding people, who were thrown into internment camps simply because their parents were born in the wrong country. That's all they did wrong. They had no right to a lawyer, no right to a fair trial, no right to a jury of their peers, no right to due process of any kind. The only right they had was...right this way! Into the internment camps.

    Just when these American citizens needed their rights the most...their government took them away. and rights aren't rights if someone can take em away. They're priveledges. That's all we've ever had in this country is a bill of TEMPORARY priviledges; and if you read the news, even badly, you know the list get's shorter, and shorter, and shorter.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 9 months ago

    Have a look at the wording in the bill of rights. "Congress shall make no law", "shall not be infringed". It's not a list of privileges granted to the people, it's a list of restrictions placed on the government.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] -3 points 9 months ago

    HAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH

    GTFO with that religious bullshit.

    "rights" are an imaginary vapid concept invented by hairless apes. and if you want to maintain your "rights" then you better get the fuck up and do something about it before the powers that be strip them all away.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 9 points 9 months ago

    It's extra funny because I knew a Mexican American guy around the first Trump term who didn't care that Trump was racist because Republicans are pro-gun. I wonder how all that's working out for him. Not enough to look him up, but enough to laugh at his stubborn stupidity.

  • source
  • [–] 2 points 9 months ago

    Trump and his minions are always acting in bad faith.

    Rules for thee and not for me.

  • source
  • [–] 4 points 9 months ago

    This article is just history and speculation of the future.

  • source
  • [–] 1 point 9 months ago

    When is the revolution you all needed your guns for?

  • source
  • [–] 0 points 9 months ago

    Clickbait horse shit.

  • source
  • [+] -16 points 9 months ago (5 children)

    Even a demented fascist is right once a decade.

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 9 months ago (2 children)

    the second amendment was to prevent tyrany. “but people do bad things with guns.” a tyrant moves to ban guns “this is a good thing, what a rare win for the tyrant…”

    can only be the smartest take.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 9 months ago (1 child)

    And how is that working out for you? Did it work well in preventing tyranny or were all the child sacrifices you had not successfull in making you feel like an action hero?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 9 months ago*

    An armed citizenry is not only successful by the amount of murderes of the correct people, the very fact the citizenry is armed changes the rate of a takeover, and has been successfully used by marginalized people in the past.

    how meny atrocities proceeded the disarmament of the populous? why would you applaud the set up happening here?

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 9 months ago (1 child)

    When fascists are "right"...you need to do the opposite. Bear arms.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 9 months ago

    Then do it. You have the right. Yet all I see is people in the US be executed and kidnapped in public without anyone doing something. You allowed all these kids being murdered to defend from dictators, yet now have a dictator and now I see americans saying they cant possibly defend against it. So might just as well protect the kids and ban guns.

  • source
  • parent