• Snapz@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    2 years ago

    The whole Russian project was to have our “polite society” collapse as we, as Americans, lost all faith in our institutions and turned against one another and in the process, also lost any kind of collective identity, which makes us a weaker target externally. That happened.

    It’s crazy to me, looking back, how much this was openly discussed along the way, as it successfully happened in slow motion over the last 10-15 years - wasn’t there also a book released that just laid their strategy bare? If there are historians in the future, will be amazing to read the perspective on all of this with time and analysis from those not trapped within the cycle of death and hopelessness.

    • Denidil@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 years ago

      It works because those of us who read and learn about things like this are a minority of the population. Not one large enough to counteract the effect either.

      • crimsonpoodle@pawb.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 years ago

        I think our society in reality is fine mostly; gun sales to conservatives under the Obama administration surged due to their fears at the time; now it happens again just in reverse.

        The key problem is that the internet is separating people and allowing foreign actors and cynical domestic interests to create filters of what people hear and see.

        you count yourself among a learned few then you should go out and create local events and spread local news as much as possible. People need to interact outside of their bubbles more and they would come to see mostly that they are both reasonable. It is only the facts that are current in question between the two isles, not necessarily the principles.

        • Snapz@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 years ago

          Think there’s a lot of false premise and privileged POV in your statements here about your perception of reality.

          Certainly not “fine mostly” by the major tangible measures that might contribute to a blanket statement like that attempting some basis in evidence. Maybe most counter to your position is the fact that the entire world is sliding right generally, most likely as an immature, frightened reaction to COVID-blamed inflation and opportunistic corporate price gouging. Among that, the lesser informed likely think that there is some “conservative” force that would reign things in - It’s the idea that “Daddy will fix it”, but in reality daddy never actually did fix anything when you were small, you just felt safe when he was there when you were a child. And Daddy isn’t here anymore anyway - the person that would be daddy is headbutting windows at the US Capitol and asking Siri “how do you make pipe-bombs filled with liberal shit”

          Also false equivalency with the Obama guns things - in that case, a lot of racist, conservative dickheads stockpiled weapons/ammo as a gut reaction and frankly a hope for a “race war”, marinating in their always assumed victimhood, simply because a HALF black person was president. Versus now, where severely, actively threatened minority communities feel that they will potentially be forced into camps because of credible threats by the presumptive president elect gop do just that. So yes, now a few, exaggerated by media, are getting gun training and basic weapons out of fear of the collapsing world they observe first hand around them as the very real threat of someone kicking in their door in the not too distant future.

          But I’m sure things are “fine mostly” for you. 401k doing okay? Still get your two full weeks in the Bahamas this summer vacation? Mom and Dad still paying your car insurance and cell phone bills on time?

  • Yewb@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 years ago

    Im a liberal guess who now has a gun safe with multiple guns?

    I guess we are making America great again by arming the liberals too?

        • theyoyomaster@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 years ago

          It’s not that easy. The vast majority of imports are banned and the remaining sporting imports are subject to significant restrictions. The overwhelming majority of guns sold in the US are produced in the US, even ones from foreign manufacturers. It’s not that dissimilar to cars.

          • HelixDab2@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            2 years ago

            I wouldn’t say that it’s the ‘vast majority’ of imports that are banned. The Gun Control Act of '68 mostly ends up applying to very small, often cheap, pistols (“Saturday night specials”), and guns that don’t have a “legitimate sporting purpose”. The ATF has said that practical shooting competitions (e.g., two gun, three gun, etc.) doesn’t count as “legitimate sporting purpose”, but the IWI Tavor is sold in the US, and is manufactured in Israel. source for that claim

            Right now Turkish guns are having a moment. The Turks are making cheap firearms–sometimes very good, sometimes just cheap-- and sometimes making outright clones of more popular popular firearms. True, you’d be supporting Erdogan, but hey, you can’t always win.

            Personally, I’m waiting for someone to start importing KMR pistols. The KMR L-02 Orca OR looks like an improved CZ Shadow II Orange, but I suspect the $3200 price tag is lot steep for most people. :(

            • CafeFrog@lemmy.cafe
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              edit-2
              2 years ago

              Turkey is actively killing and repressing the kurds of Syria, such as Rojava, so if we’re boycotting US manufacturers, might be good to avoid turkish one’s too if possible, to deprive their government of tax revenue.

              I’m not really sure if there is an ‘ethical’ choice with the big manufacturers anywhere, just different degrees of bad, though definitely worth indirectly supporting the less bad option.

              You could opt for small boutique builders that explicitly support leftists and trans, like KE Arms, but those are few and far between. Best resource I can find is this list from the liberalgunowners reddit wiki.

              Alternatively, opt for buying used guns from lefitist gun stores (if you have one near you, or can order from them online to a local ffl). That’s probably the best option from a cost and ethics perspective.

              • HelixDab2@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                2 years ago

                I will personally vouch for Russell at KE Arms; he genuinely believes that the second amendment is for all people, regardless of race, gender identity, sexual orientation, or religion. He’s a good dude, IMO.

                But fundamentally, yeah, it’s nearly impossible to buy a firearm that is 100% ethical. I know that Karl Kasarda (InRangeTV) likes Desert Tech, because they’ve been good to IRTV and haven’t given him shit about politics, religion, or affiliation with marginalized groups. I don’t like Desert Tech, because they’re run by the Kingston Clan, which is a fundamentalist Mormon cult. I’m also unwilling to buy from Daniel Defense, because they actively market themselves as being a “Christian corporation”, and I oppose that kind of religious bullshittery.

                Point is, you gotta pick and choose.

  • secretlyaddictedtolinux@lemmy.worldBanned
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 years ago

    Me months ago: “the NRA matters and feminism matters and the solution is making sure women have more and larger guns and better tactical training.”

    Everyone back then was like “no guns are bad!” and now suddenly, look who is seeing the light.

    Trans people should not be armed. Trans people should be given vouchers to buy large amounts of weapons so they can be HEAVILY armed and also should be given subsidized weapons training by the government.

    When I meet a trans women, I want to admire her dress and know she has excellent tactical training.

    We need to stop seeing gun rights as a left or right issue and appreciate the fact that guns are anti-tyranny. The left’s constant anti-stance alienates a huge number of working class people as well. The problem with any sort of “reasonable restrictions” is the government always wants more, more regulation, more rules, and little by little it gets harder for the average guy or gal or intersex person. Liberals need to stop alienating middle America with this anti-gun stuff so we can protect trans people.

  • PagingDoctorLove@lemmy.worlddeleted by creator
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 years ago

    I have a conundrum, maybe people in this thread can weigh in.

    I’m a woman living in an area with a small but loud MAGA faction and useless police who are probably also Trump supporters. I’m also not white.

    Hunting is common here, and although I’ve never been I do know how to shoot and have access to classes if I want to improve. We also have friends and family with firearms and a couple of them live nearby.

    I feel like I should get a gun. I know how to use one and I want to be able to protect myself if necessary. But I’m scared of firearms. Something about them disturbs me. Maybe it’s the likelihood of someone dying once a gun comes out. Maybe it’s just a fear, however unfounded, that I can’t or shouldn’t handle such a powerful tool. But the reason behind the feeling doesn’t matter so much as my ability to overcome it, and I’m not sure I can. If I had money to burn I’d buy one just to see how I feel, but I don’t so I can’t.

    In short, I’m torn. I want to be able to just get a gun for peace of mind and call it a day, but I fear that as soon as the gun is in my house I will become a nervous wreck and that will defeat the whole purpose.

    I’d love to hear from anyone who feels the same or has overcome this fear.

    • Cataphract@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 years ago

      Everything you’re describing is completely reasonable. For the past decades, left-wing “policy ideas” have floated banning guns or at least some form of gun control. They state statistics, examples from other countries, testimony from gun experts, etc etc all describing how perfectly harmful just owning a gun can be and how unlikely you are to ever run into a situation where a firearm will improve your situation and chances of surviving.

      This has been overtaken by the rhetoric of “they’re coming for you!tm”. The exact same playbook that was used by the right-wing. Who wins? The gun manufacturers and war profiteers.

      It’s amazing to see the collective consciousness just completely glaze over from just a few years ago. If you think you’re statistically more likely to be targeted, then it’s your right to procure a firearm in the United States and I’ll leave it at that. But, if you actually look into it, you’ll find you will be put more in danger by having a firearm in the house than not.

      You’re right about the mental aspect, if you own a firearm and are constantly thinking about it and the threats it can protect you from, you’ve created your own hellscape that many are already in. It’s much safer and better for the community to be involved in your neighbors lives and to form bonds with those close to you in a positive manner. Somehow, everyone’s forgotten the examples the rest of the world has set forth and have fallen into Americana again.

  • Dead_or_Alive@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    2 years ago

    Lol, this thread is a train wreck and is the perfect example of why Republicans keep winning elections despite being on the wrong side of history and having policies that hurt the American population at large.

    The left will never win as long as we form circular firing squads and argue over petty bullshit.

    • orcrist@lemm.eedeleted by creator
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 years ago

      I like how your comment is the perfect example of the behavior that you claim to oppose. You’re cutting into the left while identifying yourself as left, and everything you wrote was destructive. Congratulations?

      There are several reasonable positions that a person could take on this issue. You could point out the entertainment in increased calls for gun regulation. You could point out the consistency with saying that you’re going to arm yourself as long as guns are legal, but also be in favor of increased gun regulation. You could point out that there are different factions within the Democratic party and on the left in general, and how people all have their own varying agendas. You could encourage a general strategy for Democrats and Democrat supporters to get along. But you did none of that, because you didn’t care. And I don’t mind if you care, but I want other people to see it, just in case they do.

      • Shardikprime@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 years ago

        The dude is trying to give some necessary criticism, but apparently everyone is immune to that.

        Criticism is not destruction, unless you are okay with the current status quo

      • Dead_or_Alive@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        2 years ago

        Keep forming that circular firing squad.

        I’m going to slip out and duck down over here to eat some popcorn.

        • Shardikprime@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 years ago

          Nah man, people in here are not open to criticism unless it’s “the way they like it” which is none criticism at all.

          Just blame the Latino voters and move on

  • tty5@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 years ago

    Nothing gets republicans talking about gun control faster than minorities arming.

  • kipo@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 years ago

    Jessie McGrath, 63, a lifelong Republican who is trans, grew up around guns on farms in Colorado and Nebraska. She decided to vote for Harris when Republicans started attacking gender-affirming care and “wanting to basically outlaw my ability to exist”. She ended up being a delegate at the Democratic national convention.

    “Government getting involved in making healthcare decisions is something that I never thought I would see the Republican party doing,” she said.

    What the actual…how are people this ignorant.

    • Trae@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 years ago

      She was 100% on board with them regulating reproductive care because it has never personally affected her as a biological male.

      She only has an issue now that her favorite team turned on her after telling her for the last 30 years that she’s next.

      • Cethin@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 years ago

        Assigned male at birth is the term you want to use. “Biological male” is a term used by transphobes to spread misinformation.

        Biology is very complex and not your elementary school version of biology. What makes someone “biologically” male? Is it having a penis, having testis, having more testosterone than estrogen, having XY chromosomes? These can all be intermixed with other characteristics.

        The “basic biology” definition doesn’t work in the real world, and the people using it are actively trying to harm trans people or ignorant. Now you’re more informed so ignorance isn’t an excuse anymore.

        • Trae@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 years ago

          Who assigned them male at birth? What if they were raised like a cisgender female typically would be in our society?

          What makes someone “assigned at birth”? Is it dressing in masculine clothes, is it having a name like Michael and Billy, is it having a circumcision? These can all be comingled with other variations of child rearing.

          Just because a parent assigns a “gender” at birth doesn’t make it someone’s actual identifying “gender”. As a young child they have no say in the matter and it’s quite frankly wrong to whitewash their childhood history and personal trauma like that.

          Now that you’re more informed, I hope moving forward you stop trying to erase people’s adolescent psychological adversity.

          • octopus_ink@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            2 years ago

            Man, just reread what was shared with you and take the learning experience. You tried to be cute by making a mad-lib out of it and you sound way worse now than you did two comments up.

            Edit hours later after checking to see if my advice was heeded:

            • Trae@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              2 years ago

              Oh no, I didn’t heed my trans wisdoms lords advice and they’ve decided to deride someone for a singular word choice to make themselves feel morally superior!

              This will definitely advance the trans acceptance of the common person! Or maybe stay with me here for a moment, not everyone on the internet is as accepting as you are and when they see someone getting slammed for “wrong speak” it reinforces their shitty beliefs.

              “If someone who loves and supports trans people is getting shit on for saying a double plus ungood word by other trans allies, then why would I ever want to be a part of that.”

              I’ve heard these conversations verbatim from people I work with who hold actual hatred for trans people and trans acceptance. Once again though you’re all living for up votes and that brief instance you get to feel morally superior on the internet and share these snippets in your discord groups. This is clearly such a flippant topic for you that all you could muster up is a meme.

          • formergijoe@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            2 years ago

            The house just made it illegal for trans people to use the bathroom they want in the capital, and Kansas, Montana, Oklahoma, Tennessee, and West Virginia have banned people from changing their gender on their ID.

            Tennessee also requires an ID to vote, so if a transgender woman shows up with a big old “M” on her state-issued ID, some fake-news-stolen-election minded poll worker can keep her from voting.

            Granted, these don’t outlaw hormone therapy or anything, but these are gender affirming actions outlawed by the government.

  • CaptPretentious@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 years ago

    America, can we stop it with the guns and violence?

    I get the idea of wanting to defend oneself, but that ultimately means a shootout. It’s hardly going to matter who shot the first bullet in the history books. The far right are also going to arm themselves when they see other people arming themselves. And it’s only going to ‘prove them right’ in their eyes.

    Do I have a better solution, no. But more mass shootings isn’t going to be the answer. And it’s only going to take one shootout before it’s used in a legal sense against people. And guns aren’t going to be what’s made illegal in the United States, especially with a republican-controlled government…

    • CafeFrog@lemmy.cafe
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 years ago

      You could make that same argument to the countries neighboring Nazi Germany.

      We have examples in history of what happens to unarmed people when fascists take over and few fight back, and it does nothing to quell the fascist’s efforts or ‘fears’. We also have examples of armed people fighting back, like the leftists in the Spanish Civil war. Their defeat was not a given, and they made the fascists work bloody hard for it. The alternative would’ve been the leftists having to blend in or be disappeared/killed, or they could’ve left everything and fled. The less you fight them, the stronger they become, until they become too big to run from or ignore.

  • phoneymouse@lemmy.worlddeleted by creator
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 years ago

    The left needs to get on board with this. Govt isn’t going to protect you from far right militias when the shit hits the fan.

    • nothing@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 years ago

      Cops aren’t required to protect you from anything. Learn how to protect you and yours. And learn how to read situations, always.

      • Drusas@fedia.io
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 years ago

        Don’t be ableist. There is plenty enough that is actually wrong with him that you could target instead of the fact that he’s disabled.

  • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 years ago

    I do not blame any woman or queer person arming themselves in the U.S. right now. But I think that you should think of it as personal protection rather than preparation for something larger.

    Be aware of this:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disarmament_of_the_German_Jews

    The Jews of Germany constituted less than 1 percent of the country’s population. It is preposterous to argue that the possession of firearms would have enabled them to mount resistance against a systematic program of persecution implemented by a modern bureaucracy, enforced by a well-armed police state, and either supported or tolerated by the majority of the German population. Mr. Carson’s suggestion that ordinary Germans, had they had guns, would have risked their lives in armed resistance against the regime simply does not comport with the regrettable historical reality of a regime that was quite popular at home. Inside Germany, only the army possessed the physical force necessary for defying or overthrowing the Nazis, but the generals had thrown in their lot with Hitler early on.

    Obviously, women and queer people are a lot more than 1% of the population, but you can’t count on every queer person being on the right side and you certainly can’t count on every woman to be on the right side.

      • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 years ago

        What a bunch of slave-owners thought about guns hundreds of years ago is not really relevant to today.

        And if you’re going to attack someone for thinking people should be armed for the wrong reason, maybe you should find better targets.

        • WraithGear@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 years ago

          Whoa, I’m not attacking you. I have a difference in opinion as to why people should be armed. Not saying that one does not have a right to self defense, just that i put stock in the need to collectively hold the government accountable and fight tyranny

          • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            2 years ago

            And you can see why, from what I already wrote, that is not likely to work unless the majority is on your side. And the military.

            • WraithGear@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              2 years ago

              The military has had a pretty lousy track record against gorilla warfare from much smaller, worse armed groups who, by the width of an ocean were unable to affect logistical lines, the means to project warfare, or the families of our soldiers. A Revolution within would be much worse.

              • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                2 years ago

                How many innocent people died in those wars? It’s not very nice of you to be willing to put their lives on the line like that.

                • WraithGear@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  2 years ago

                  Oh? Now it’s a discussion about who should be sacrificed and for what. Freedom always has a cost. I never removed myself from the possibility. But right now, the royal “we”, seem to be sacrificing the minority, the different, the poor, the non christian and it gets worse every day. Freedoms are slipping, corporations get stronger, and standards of living and hope for the future fades. This will only accelerate. Arguing to arm oneself for personal protection but not collective action will doom all, but the chosen, to be picked off one by one.

      • EldritchFemininity@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 years ago

        It was also opposed by George Washington on the argument that “A bunch of farmers with guns will never defeat a trained army.” He basically did exactly that, but it took the support of one of the world’s largest super powers at the time in order to do it - France.

        Not to say don’t arm yourself. I plan on doing exactly that myself. But don’t expect to be overthrowing the dictatorship to come. There are no resistance groups being armed by the EU here.

        • Not_mikey@slrpnk.net
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 years ago

          Washington was talking about the militias that were present in the early parts of the war that were under trained and undisciplined. The red coats took them easily and they fled often so the continental congress started the continental army lead by Washington, which was a trained and disciplined army in the style of European standing armies, which was able to take on and even defeat the British occasionally.

          After the war the ruling elite still had this idealized vision of citizen militias protecting the liberty of white man and saw it as a less tyrannical, and cheaper model then the European professional standing army and made the second amendment to encourage it. Washington was saying that that system failed and will never work and that we should have a trained army ready to take on European powers if they come back.

          Now we have the worst of both worlds, a massive army that gobbles up tax dollars and a bunch of untrained citizens with guns who barely understand what a militia is much less can protect the liberty of the nation.

      • pyre@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 years ago

        that was before tanks and instant communication. the army would have been less organized and maybe you could have a chance against the government, especially as a militia. today you don’t.

        you do have a chance against a bunch of fuckwads who threaten you because the party they voted for won and the think they can rape freely now. just not the government.

        • WraithGear@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 years ago

          The last three wars have been pretty recent, and haven’t not gone well against a foe no where near or equal. Not so much as a pyric victory, but an eventual unwillingness to keep wasting time and money and lives, and we just left. What do you call it when you just leave a war failing all your objectives and handing over territory to the enemy?

          • FindME@lemmy.myserv.one
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            2 years ago

            I’m not saying you are wrong, but the biggest difference, and one that actually matters, is that there was a very clear us vs. them defined and easily spotted. In Vietnam, Iraq, and Afghanistan we were fighting against people that blended in and weren’t being actively turned on by their neighbors. Here, you can bet every dickish Dick that voted red would happily report on the neighbors that they even have an iota of suspicion about resisting the orange cunt.

            • WraithGear@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              2 years ago

              Actually you are describing how it would not be different at all than these other wars. An insurgency in the us would be particularly hard to pick out. There would be no outward appearance between “us” or “them” we are a very diverse nation after all. Also, in these wars neighbors were turning each other in left and right. It was nearly impossible to determine if it was legitimate, or a personal squabble, or some random in order to get brownie points with the us. People are no different over here.

              Besides, i will not entertain the idea that fighting against tyranny is wrong because it would be hard.

            • RaoulDook@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              2 years ago

              We have psychos trying to implement a theocratic government and oppressing women and minorities like Afghanistan

    • CafeFrog@lemmy.cafe
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      2 years ago

      As an alternative, if we assume that a significant portion of the left is armed instead of just a minority, Rojava would be a good modern day example of the realistic effectiveness of an armed populace, as they employ horizontal citizen militias to survive against both ISIS and Turkey.

      The Spanish Civil War is another interesting example, as the initial response from the left/anarchists when the fascists began their coup attempt was made up of civilian militias formed quickly and armed with whatever they had or could source from a local armory, and they were able to effectively fight off the initial coup in almost half the country, and gather themselves up for a protracted conflict. It’s not quite as direct an example, as the leftists in that conflict we supplemented with tanks and airplanes and artillery from the USSR, but firearms were an essential piece to their resistance, and had the populace been more armed before hand, it would’ve been helpful, as they had trouble producing and acquiring enough through trade.

      There’s a great series on the Spanish Civil War here that gets into the nitty gritty, if you’re interested. :)

    • RedditRefugee69@lemmynsfw.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 years ago

      It’s not about mounting an organized resistance. It’s about making the black bag squads scared of coming to your house specifically.

      When the chips are down, nobody’s got your back like you do.

      • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 years ago

        That’s literally what I said:

        I think that you should think of it as personal protection rather than preparation for something larger.

  • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 years ago

    Stay strapped or get clapped…

    It feels like they picked the worst screenshot intentionally though when talking about that YouTuber…

    Like, maybe it’s a new kind of magnifier that you flip up to use instead of off to the side to not use. But that AR just doesn’t look like whoever built it knew what they were doing.

    Like the BLM protests where it was obvious people went out and bought ARs just for the event and didn’t even put sights on beforehand.

    That being said don’t wander around gun YouTube on your account it only takes a couple videos for the algorithm to decide you’re a gun nut, and that comes along with a bunch of other rightwing videos, because normally it does.

    But Reagan is the one who passed Cali’s gun laws, and he did so because people he didn’t like were marching with guns.

    Obviously it would have made more sense to start when Biden was in office, but it seems like unless protestors carry guns, the cops will just beat them without a second thought.

    If they even think some have guns tho… Cops won’t do shit.

    • Carmakazi@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 years ago

      If cops get return fire in a (leftist) protest/riot, they’ll come back with MRAPs and live rounds and re-enact Kent State. They live for that moment.

      Oh, and that magnifier is on a Unity FAST mount, and yes, it flips up to get in position. It’s on a higher sight plane along with the Eotech to help with shooting while using things like night vision goggles, and a lot of people say it’s more natural and comfortable for fast shooting in general. It’s actually some Gucci shit and looks squared away to me.

      • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 years ago

        Weird, I never saw one of those before, but if it works it’s way better than hanging off to the side.

        And I think you’re forgetting how much cops are cowards. They won’t go into a school when it’s one kid with an AR and they have a seat team.

        They’ll say they want a firefight all fucking day, when they get the opportunity they shit their pants.

        But we know how they treat unarmed protestors, and the difference when there’s guns present.