Indeed, best way to be in power as a fascist is to make sure the population is well armed
Buy on AliExpress.com
'Murica! (167 Viewers)
- Thread starter Fake Melo
- Start date
- Tags afl_italia's cousins forza trump smocking gun
Buy on AliExpress.com
Indeed, best way to be in power as a fascist is to make sure the population is well armed
Изпратено от моят XQ-AU52 с помощта на Tapatalk
Not American but I think the problem is deeper than the Second Amendment. Obviously, the Second Amendment helps a lot to facilitate these situations and the amount of guns in hands of civilians is insane, but the deeper problem is how violent is the U.S. society and how individualistic is (not saying being individualistic is bad, saying that the U.S. has taken this to an extreme level). The U.S would still have this problem even if the Second Amendment was abolished. There is a reason why some countries have a huge amount of guns in civilians’ hands and still don’t have this kind of issue.
Why would anyone need such a powerful weapon, like why is it not at least limited to less dangerous killing machines? Genuine question. Ban abortion so kids can get shot in a school.
How can anti abortion laws be so easily pushed to save the lives of unborn children but no action be taken on guns that can stop some (not all) random gun deaths?
Also why is it so easy to get a gun?
How can anti abortion laws be so easily pushed to save the lives of unborn children but no action be taken on guns that can stop some (not all) random gun deaths?
Also why is it so easy to get a gun?
I don’t think gun ownership is a problem in and of itself. Canada is 7th on the civilian owned guns/capita list, ahead of Switzerland and also has a fraction of the gun homicides/capita of the US. From what I recall reading of Switzerland and of the gun laws here in Canada, they don’t allow for assault style weapons to be civilian owned. I think civilians owning assault style weapons is absurd though. There is zero reason to possess such a weapon, it is entirely useless for self-defense, hunting, and anything else a civilian might need/want a gun for. Then there’s also just the larger societal problems in the US today. Large parts of the country are pretty chaotic and dangerous for various reasons. Doesn’t make America less great a nation or anything, but it definitely has its issues with violence and a lot of animosity and hate amongst the populace right now. Seems to only be getting worse unfortunately.
If this is slavery, I gotta say I am pretty down with it.
I sometimes get caught reacting with my Chicago hyper-paranoid street smarts, and locals be like, "Whoah, dude? Where did that come from? I was just coming over to ask a question." American's don't just have itchy trigger-fingers. They're jumpy at any shadows.
Feeling like you're always on potential death alert isn't exactly healthy. It's no wonder American lifespans are in decline, really.
A dozen people die in the US, and it's a bit more like India: "Well, that sucks. Everybody back to work." Here one person loses their life at the hands of someone else and the society goes bonkers over it in outrage for how unacceptable that should be. Even for kids in slums.
Women tell me how bizarrely liberating it is to get off a train at midnight, walk through the city, and actually feel safe.
It's kind of embarrassing how little America values human life, really.
It is deeper. I realize that a lot of the U.S. is hung up on common aims, but deeply divergent ideas of causality. It's not so much the what as much as the how or why. And those often split along, say, individualistic (rather than violent, IMO) lines.
There's a lot of decoupling between the proliferation of guns and societal safety -- the idea mostly being around "I got mine, and I can trust myself and my family" and that's where the line of responsibility, or perceived dependency, ends. (Until suicide and domestic violence enters the picture.)
Even taking the personal out of it, a lot of people see no sense in demilitarizing the police, whereas others see militarized police as a form of distrust, invader mentality, and escalation for combat. (Side note: my brother is a police officer of many years, and he did well to enter community spaces without drawing his gun first.) There's a disconnect about how you show up and how that makes others show up, potentially backfiring any perceived safety measures you might take.
I do have to credit this much ... the business of selling ever more deadly arms in America has a highly "virtuous" cycle. More school shootings, more buyers. More buyers, more arms war escalations with your neighbors. Who wouldn't want to be the arms dealer selling to both the USA and USSR during the cold war? Business is good as fear rises.
I sometimes get caught reacting with my Chicago hyper-paranoid street smarts, and locals be like, "Whoah, dude? Where did that come from? I was just coming over to ask a question." American's don't just have itchy trigger-fingers. They're jumpy at any shadows.
Feeling like you're always on potential death alert isn't exactly healthy. It's no wonder American lifespans are in decline, really.
A dozen people die in the US, and it's a bit more like India: "Well, that sucks. Everybody back to work." Here one person loses their life at the hands of someone else and the society goes bonkers over it in outrage for how unacceptable that should be. Even for kids in slums.
Women tell me how bizarrely liberating it is to get off a train at midnight, walk through the city, and actually feel safe.
It's kind of embarrassing how little America values human life, really.
It is deeper. I realize that a lot of the U.S. is hung up on common aims, but deeply divergent ideas of causality. It's not so much the what as much as the how or why. And those often split along, say, individualistic (rather than violent, IMO) lines.
There's a lot of decoupling between the proliferation of guns and societal safety -- the idea mostly being around "I got mine, and I can trust myself and my family" and that's where the line of responsibility, or perceived dependency, ends. (Until suicide and domestic violence enters the picture.)
Even taking the personal out of it, a lot of people see no sense in demilitarizing the police, whereas others see militarized police as a form of distrust, invader mentality, and escalation for combat. (Side note: my brother is a police officer of many years, and he did well to enter community spaces without drawing his gun first.) There's a disconnect about how you show up and how that makes others show up, potentially backfiring any perceived safety measures you might take.
I do have to credit this much ... the business of selling ever more deadly arms in America has a highly "virtuous" cycle. More school shootings, more buyers. More buyers, more arms war escalations with your neighbors. Who wouldn't want to be the arms dealer selling to both the USA and USSR during the cold war? Business is good as fear rises.
I don’t see any reason to need an automatic assault weapon for hunting. Not necessary at all. Unless the idea is that you’re hunting humans… 
"Assault weapon" is a term created by politics (it includes characteristics on pistols, shotguns and rifles that were once banned but no longer are in the US) it is not an actual classification of firearm.
An assault rifle is a specific classification of firearm and one of the characteristics is supposed to be select fire, meaning you can change it from semi to full auto. Obviously, civilian assault rifles in the US are manufactured to not have the full auto option.
As for an automatic weapon being more dangerous, I would say it depends how experienced and competent you are. Many schmucks could probably not use one effectively but Steven Paddock sure did
An assault rifle is a specific classification of firearm and one of the characteristics is supposed to be select fire, meaning you can change it from semi to full auto. Obviously, civilian assault rifles in the US are manufactured to not have the full auto option.
As for an automatic weapon being more dangerous, I would say it depends how experienced and competent you are. Many schmucks could probably not use one effectively but Steven Paddock sure did
