top 96 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 46 points 9 months ago (14 children)

COPY/PASTA

In the US we have the Second Amendment. The fascists have been the ones screaming and yelling about the Second Amendment, but the truth is that all Americans have the right.

Owning a gun isn't enough. Driving to Cabela's and picking up a vermin killing .22 rifle is not enough. You should buy a proper rifle, a pistol, and a knife or baton. (Bonus points for a shotgun) Then you need to train with said rifle, pistol and knife/baton. Go to a range and shoot. Look for local self defense/hand to hand combat with a weapon classes and train.

I am not advocating for violence...far from it. But I am advocating for knowledge because owning a weapon and not knowing how to use it is a recipe for disaster.

PS: If you can afford it, buy suppressors and/or active hearing protection. Especially for your rifles. Suppression for the common citizen isn't about stealth like in the movies, it is about protecting your hearing. Guns are LOUD. Much louder than you expect. Suppressors might be out of reach for most but quality active and passive hearing protection is not.

  • source
  • hideshow 14 child comments
  • [–] 22 points 9 months ago (4 children)

    Familiarity is important, training will save your life.

    Get an IFAK and go to a stop the bleed class https://www.stopthebleed.org/

    If you’re currently versed in Firearms and are able to start a chapter, or if you are lucky enough to live in an area with a local chapter the SRA is a good organization. However they are apparently fractured and their politics may not align. https://socialistra.org/

    https://www.blazingsword.org/ is better for LGBTQ+ anarchists that tend to not get along with Tankies.

    A more decentralized option could be a John Brown Gun Club https://www.counterextremism.com/supremacy/john-brown-gun-club

    Good basis of organized tactics. The guide below is more about organized movement than direct fire. Below will NOT help you in a firefight as it relies on a much larger trained force than you are likely to have. Good to know what the bastards study though. https://www.trngcmd.marines.mil/Portals/207/Docs/TBS/B2F2837%20Rifle%20Squad%20Tactics.pdf?ver=2015-05-27-100939-710

    How to avoid getting balled up and kettled. https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/anarch-ish-how-to-win-at-kettling-a-guide-for-non-policemen

    Sabotage guide from WW2 https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/26184.txt.utf-8

    General armed defense https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/organizing-armed-defense-in-america

    How to organize a rapid response from a very high level with further detailed resources. https://southerncoalition.org/resources/rapid-response-101/

    Good general advice on organizing, also a good resource to find groups near you that are likely aligned. https://www.fiftyfifty.one/organizer-resources

    Feel free to reach out for any other resources

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

    Unfortunately, you also need to know how you'll react in a life or death situation. Most people haven't experienced being involved in a gun battle, and no matter how you think you'll react, you don't know until shots start firing.

    I had always assumed I'd freeze up if it happened, but when I was on Bourbon Street during Mardi gras when shots rang out, I surprised myself. I immediately, without thinking, got down and ducked into an alley, then had to go back for my friends who froze.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 6 points 9 months ago (5 children)

    It really is a damn shame suppressors are illegal in California.

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

    It's moronic. We demand lower noise in most products, but demand higher noise in guns because we can't distinguish Hollywood bullshit from reality. I think most CA Dems would accept the premise that reducing injurious noise levels while participating in a legal activity is a good idea, but institutionally they'd never give an inch on gun laws.

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

    Let's be real here, if CA had their way, the only guns citizens would be legally allowed to own are muzzleloaders/muskets, and even then those would be heavily regulated.

    I swear, CA becomes more of a nanny state by the day, and unfortunately, many people in LA and SF just nod in smug approval.

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

    For sure, but my point was that t hey know that outright banning guns is nearly impossible, so they've done essentially what the republicans have done on abortion. They've attacked it on every other conceivable angle: they've made it hard to buy guns, hard to use them, hard to run any business that sells them, hard to buy ammo, hard to stay in legal compliance with constantly changing laws and case law.

    The state's strategy has essentially morphed to enacting every law and policy that makes it harder to buy, own, and use guns, knowing that most of them are not legal, but get them tied up in courts indefinitely. It's a scummy strategy, but it's been fairly effective.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (1 child)

    Maybe I'm just old, but suppressors seem pointless to me. If I understand correctly, you need to use subsonic ammo to get the full effect, which pretty much negates the extra "stopping power" of rifles (or higher velocity handguns). Simple foam ear plugs, like many people wear to work, can be as good or better in terms of db reduction if going to a range or popping some off in "the back 40" if you're fortunate. If you need to run to your gun in an emergency to save you're own life, I don't think you'd take the time to grab your hearing protection. Hearing impaired is better than dead. And you're definitely not going to EDC active hearing protection. Perhaps I'm not understanding the benefits though. I see the benefits if it's like your job or something (work at a range, are a rancher that shoots vermin/predators at night). I suppose if you're training in some kind of militia to work in a squad, active hearing protection with integrated radio would be nice, but virtually nobody is doing that.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • Even with hearing protection protracted use of firearms still causes hearing damage. A suppressed firearm is going to cause less damage over time than an unsuppressed. Is it perfect? Nope, but it is better than nothing.

    I recently watched a video on the differences of a suppressed and unsuppressed weapon in the field. You can tell a difference certainly, and again, it's enough to reduce harm to your hearing.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
    [+] 40 points 9 months ago (3 children)
  • [–] 19 points 9 months ago (12 children)

    Funny thing is, if an armed populace is utterly incapable of doing a single damn thing as the gun banners say they are, WHY do the authoritarians in charge of these powerful modern military still banning guns?

  • source
  • hideshow 12 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 9 months ago (10 children)

    Same reason they only come out when surrounded by bulletproof glass or in sniper-controlled areas now. They don't want to be individually targeted.

    Now it's interesting to imagine what would happen if hundreds of officials were individually targeted, but having a bunch of guns at your house ≠ that. Still the issue of targeted suppression exists, and would be highly effective.

    If you burn down a neighborhood, if you shoot an RPG or a drone at a house, none of the guns inside matter, except they make it more lethal as you try to escape. They also make your house more unsafe for kids and yourself (statistically).

    Arming yourself up defensively just doesn't do much. If they want you dead, they're gonna do it in a zero-casualty-for-them way. They can do that en masse, they can do that in rural or urban areas. They train for that 24/7. They love that.

    Arming yourself offensively, well that's something else. I don't know if that's what's being suggested when this issue comes up though.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 9 months ago (8 children)

    It's problematic to say you're arming up to actively hurt someone, even on Lemmy I believe they have rules against it. So you can only say I want to defend myself or try to imply through a wink or nudge.

    What I'm tired of though is people thinking it's all going to be lone gunmen or large formations of people fighting. This is a resistance movement, we should be thinking like the French did when the Nazis came.

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

    Yeah, large formations wouldn’t work, but I don’t understand your lone gunmen comment. How would individuals form a resistance within a surveillance state? The surveillance state’s powers are currently being revamped with greater mass analysis abilities. The difficulty in organizing a resistance beyond protesting will probably mean more individuals taking drastic actions on their own, than if organizing was easy.

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

    Principle amount of "well go do it" people seem to infer lone gunman to me. Just generally comments from anti-gun people and those outside the USA.

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

    “well go do it”

    Bugs me too. They don’t seem to realize the complexity of it.

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

    And the general blood lust of non-USA people telling us to start killing one another in the streets.  Wonderful people.

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

    Yeah, the shoe has never been on the other foot. You reap what you sow and all that.

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

    Go do anything more like. Your high horse is dead, you should get off it.

    If you want to talk about how the us is somehow different then the rest of the world then consider this as comeuppance for telling other people in other nations what they should do for years and years.

    But really, do something, or collapse already.

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

    Yeah, a civil war of mass action will never happen, and if it did happen, the left would be crushed with millions of casualties. The great majority of the violent power is in fascist hands. They will command 80%+ of the military and civilian police forces. The majority of civil armament, training, and callous disregard for life is on the right. Those somewhat in the middle will shift rightward when their friends and families who are military and police get attacked.

    The MAGA base, cops and military are mostly idiots or brainwashed zealots. They are used as pawns. They are not the puppet masters.

    Attention needs focused on the Epstein class.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 19 points 9 months ago (1 child)
  • [–] 28 points 9 months ago (6 children)

    I like not being a gringo.

    I like living in a normal country.

    I like living in a country that's not controlled by a cabal of pedofiles.

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

    Ok to points 1. and 2.

    But where is this Shangri La you speak of?

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

    The this:

    [Author] portrays Shangri-La as a mystical, harmonious valley, gently guided from a lamasery, enclosed in the western end of the Kunlun Mountains. In the novel, the people who live in Shangri-La are almost immortal, living hundreds of years beyond the normal lifespan and only very slowly ageing in appearance

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 35 points 9 months ago (19 children)

    Cops shouldn't have assault rifles either, they're not the military. I find the second amendment so fucking dumb. It's to rise up against a tyrannical government. But since you have it, precisely now is the time to use it. Helloooow? Why don't you use it? You have a tyrannical government full of pedophiles. All those decades full of innocent deaths, all so you can keep your precious second amendment, just in case you reach a point you are in now. Well, go ahaid then, prove all those deaths were worth it. Bunch of self-centered uneducated hypocrites.

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

    I agree with you. The issue is that the people who have been fighting to keep the second amendment are the ones who are siding with and enabling the government. The pro-second amendment people are the ones who voted for Trump in the first place.

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

    So? Are they the only ones allowed to buy guns? Or is the second amendment also for the Trump haters?

    When my government would turn complete authoritarian fascist, I would love it if I could just buy a gun in the local supermarket.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 9 months ago (5 children)

    I'm assuming from the way your comment is worded that you're not from the U.S.

    Blue states tend to have much stricter gun laws, as another user pointed out. For example, in California, "Assault Rifles" are banned. You most certainly cannot walk into a supermarket and buy an AR-15. As far as i'm aware, most major retailers including Walmart don't sell guns at all in California. Even handguns have a maximum magazine capacity. No more than 10 rounds. Much less than your standard Glock or Sig Sauer.

    I'd also like to point out that "Buying a gun in the local supermarket" is a little bit of a misconception. It's true that some superstores sell guns, but they aren't right next to the milk and bread. They're in locked cabinets in a specific part of the store where you'll also find other hunting equipment. The whole point of a superstore/supermarket is that they sell everything in one place as opposed to the pre-supermarket days where you had to go to multiple different stores just to get your weekly shopping supplies.

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

    Over here, we don't need to buy guns with our weekly shopping supplies. We have liquor over 20% alcohol in a different section of the store. Can't even buy cigarettes at the supermarket. Even slingshots and batons are illegal here. Did you know, with a 10 round magazine you can still kill 10 people before reloading? If your aim is right. That's an acceptable amount? As those magazine sizes are allowed.

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

    That's what i've been saying for years. You don’t need a 30 round AR-15. A manual, 4 - 5 round bolt-action hunting rifle in the right hands can also be used for a mass shooting. Yet they're completely legal in states like California. The only reason "Assault Rifles" (and I use quotation marks because the name "Assault Rifle" is based on a misconception) are so heavily regulated and labeled as having "evil features" is because they look scary. The AR-15 is a semi-automatic rifle, NOT full auto. Functionally, it's no different to a hunting rifle. Yet the media never shuts up about that one specific model of rifle.

    Looks Scary ≠ Lethality. I wish people would realize that.

    Criminals don't follow the rules anyway, so you can put as many restrictions on guns as you want for all the difference it will make. At least here in the U.S.

    Unfortunately some people struggle to grasp that concept.

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

    I've been in the military for 15 years. Semi auto is far more lethal than full auto. You control every bullet instead of emptying a full clip in a few seconds in spray mode, hitting with the first bullet and missing the rest. It's just that you don't know what the stray bullets hit.

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

    I would love it if I could just buy a gun in the local supermarket.

    The democrat states/cities have much harsher gun laws. The republican states/cities aren't going to resist Trump.

    If more people would move to the left we would see more anti-fascist gun resistance (think Black Panther Party). But since people still believe that we can fix this decades-long decline by voting in the right Democrats, we're going to have to learn the hard way.

  • source
  • parent
  • [+] 3 points 9 months ago (2 children)
  • [–] 4 points 9 months ago (1 child)

    Most guns are semi auto and semi auto rifles are great for hunting things like wild boar fascists.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • [–] -1 points 9 months ago (6 children)

    The interpretation of the 2nd amendment that the courts take never made sense to me. It clearly says states can have well-regulated militias, not that citizens must have rifles with 50rd drum magazines.

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

    A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

    Emphasis mine - obviously there's more than one interpretation, but I think that if the intent was to only protect the rights of people to keep and bear arms if and only if they are members of some organized militia, it would have been clearly indicated by the text. It seems obvious to me that everything before that comma is explanatory, personally.

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

    It's very funny to me how much of US law discussion is arguing the intent of what some slavers wrote 250 years ago.

    Is it even worse in Europe? Are people holding up the Magna Carta and going "see, it was never intended for widows to remarry"

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

    The reality is that a lot of that law discussion is bullshit, the Supreme Court infamously just picks and chooses constitutional interpretations to support whatever goes in line with whatever they wanted to do in the first place. The more you learn about the Supreme Court, the more obvious it becomes.

    I can't speak for the rest of Europe, but we don't have anything similar here, but we don't have a written constitution.

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

    Perhaps. I read it as the "setup" being the emphasized part (i.e. the context set by the first part of the sentence), with the states being a representative of the "people" under the political theory at the time.. This was written by the elite more or less fine with slavery and indentured servitude, and only thought that white male landowners really counted. Either way, I think regular citizens should be able own firearms.

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

    You can actually look at court cases that wildly expanded the second amendment throughout the years.

    This idea that a gun is a given right for whatever reason you want was precisely not the understood reading of the text through much of the country's history.

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

    "Arm" yourselves with gas masks, hardhats, traffic cones (if holes for air at the top, duct tape them shut.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 12 points 9 months ago (1 child)

    Doomed if you do. Doomed if you don't. So might as well be a man and do what you believe in.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 7 points 9 months ago (8 children)

    Who you gonna shoot? I'm serious. Stalin was a bankrobber. Haitians drove Napoleon's army into the sea with machetes. The Black Panthers took several pigs off roll-call. What's your plan, revolutionary?

  • source
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 43 points 9 months ago (5 children)

    Im not american but hopefully nobody. Their whole rationality for having guns everywhere all the time is that if everyone has a gun nobody needs a gun.

    We, the rest of the world, think its a stupid idea, but if the government is literally killing people in the streets and declaring the murderers as heroes, its not looking so daft.

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

    For the first time in my life I have considered a gun. I agree with your comment, it's typically something I don't need or want. I don't want my neighbours to want them or need them.

    But here we are and it's terrible.

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

    Simply being prepared for the worst is a plenty fine plan. Just, actually be prepared, don't just buy a gun and expect to know how to use it proficiently when the need arises.

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

    You all have guns, don't see anyone using them but the popo? Way to stand against an aggressive state, eh!

  • source
  • hideshow 18 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 9 months ago (5 children)

    Fun fact! If you've ever been involuntarily committed to like a psychiatric hospital you're barred by Federal law from owning firearms! Some kinds of emergency and temporary holds are okay, but yeah because my wife had technically gotten involuntarily committed years ago before we met because she couldn't make it to the hospital safely for it to be voluntary she can't have them at all and it's unclear if I'd be able to with my own history of mental health issues

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

    This does make sense, so I'm confused why it's actually law. I thought common sense gun laws were non existent in the USA?!

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

    Because apparently people don't learn the laws like they should before they spout off. Like it's illegal to own or purchase a firearm if you're a convicted domestic abuser. Now enforcement, we can talk how lax that might be.

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

    Dude, I'm an ignorant commenter on an idiot post on an idiot social media program, making an ignorant joke. Why the fuck would I learn American gun laws living in Canada? Sorta most of the problem is the laws are there, there's just no one doing anything about it unless you got melatonin or commit another crime.

    Now we got your shit spreading to my country and some unstable fuck went and shot up a highschool where they felt rejected from or some shit. And we have sensible laws, but lax justice and enforcement as well. We all need to stop hating each other man, life is hard enough as is.

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

    Yeah, that whole second amendment thing turned out to be the joke we all thought. I've never known a nation to just roll over and take it as much as this bunch. They're pathetic and their overlords obviously know it.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] -2 points 9 months ago (4 children)

    Or, and hear me out here, we're really trying to not give dipshit the ammo he needs to deploy the military against us. Because when that happens, it's game over.

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

    Where are you looking for the report coverage?

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

    Mostly here and Reddit. I'm Canadian too, so my news is slightly less biased. Slightly.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 7 months ago

    I used to hit up reddit for the communities maintained by the major boxstore retail workers (grocery, hardware, and warehouse). Largely I find that anything big enough to call itself news anymore isn't. Best I have is some citizen journalism that I'm finding through webrings, and reading several articles mostly to make a tally of what they AREN'T talking about. I've tagged my local and regional official feeds to follow them without a filter (RSS in thunderbird, so almost no learning curve).

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 9 months ago (2 children)

    Because we don't all have guns, the data is skewed by the far right rednecks who each have like 20 guns

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

    I know plenty of democrats or centrists with guns, they just happen to also be rational people. It's time to bring them out though.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • Agreed, I want to see a quarter of the people in demonstrations armed. Not fighting, just armed, expressing their constitutional rights. I want them to also patrol and secure neighborhoods, be armed when in public. I want ICE to really consider next time they're going to execute someone instead of just walking up to them on the ground and putting a round in their head.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments
    view more: next ›