• @enbyecho@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    -35 months ago

    'Cause nothing solves a gun problem like more guns**

    ** I am a gun owner for the exact reasons cited in the article.

  • @SpitSalute@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    135 months ago

    We as leftists, must organize in ways that match the fascists. Subversion of their goals is our goal. The class and culture war is in full effect and we must not be complacent.

  • @Yewb@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    555 months 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?

      • @Yewb@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        75 months ago

        I get that but im surrounded by people with guns who could take everything from me if they chose to.

        • @theyoyomaster@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          45 months 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
            25 months 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
              3
              edit-2
              5 months 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
                25 months 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.

        • @captainlezbian@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          35 months ago

          Sweden: for when you need a gun but don’t want to fund domestic fascism, and also need some cheap furniture while arming yourself …and maybe could I get one of those fighter jets on the side?

  • @Snapz@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    38
    edit-2
    5 months 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
      195 months 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
        45 months 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
          25 months 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?

    • @Infomatics90@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      165 months ago

      Yes it is called the foundations of geopolitics, written by Aleksandr Dugin. Its free to read on the internet archive.

  • irotsoma
    link
    fedilink
    English
    65 months ago

    Ive had one for a while. It’s not something I hope to ever use, but now it’s less likely that an armed person will be coming after me for my money, which I can just give and not have to kill to defend myself, and more likely they’re coming for my life.

  • @HelixDab2@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    475 months ago

    Fucking FINALLY.

    Yes, women should be armed. Gay people should be armed. Trans people should be armed. Religious minorities should be armed. People that are on the political left never should have ceded the right to keep and bear arms to the political right.

    I’m planning on getting certified as a firearms instructor through the NRA (because no matter how shitty the NRA-ILA is, the training programs are solid) this coming year so that I can start working with The Pink Pistols and Operation Blazing Spear.

    I would strongly suggest that people try reading This Nonviolence Stuff’ll Get You Killed: How Guns Made the Civil Rights Movement Possible.

    If you’re one of the people that is considering getting a gun, please listen to the “It Could Happen Here” podcast episode titled, Safe Gun Ownership.

      • @Pilferjinx@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        165 months ago

        It’s only a bad idea when the people who want to hurt you aren’t armed. Sadly, in America, that’s not the case.

        • @emmy67@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          -105 months ago

          Nope, time and again we see law enforcement doesn’t work that way for minorities. The same gun laws that protect the majority are used against those in minorities.

          Also gives cops an excuse to kill us. Which they often use.

          • @Tinidril@midwest.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            35 months ago

            The kind of cop you are talking about is a coward. They are far less likely to harass protesters when they are open carrying.

              • Well yes, and they fear for their lives so goddamn much of the time because they’re poorly trained cowards who are used to being the high school bully and the wife beater and never having their authority threatened.

              • @Tinidril@midwest.social
                link
                fedilink
                English
                55 months ago

                It’s one thing for them to be afraid you might be armed, and quite another to know you are armed and surrounded by allies who are also armed.

            • Carighan Maconar
              link
              fedilink
              15 months ago

              A very american perspective, tbh. From soneone in a country where you’re not allowed to carry a gun around as a random idiot, it’s so wild to read.

              Then again, I also understand that this external perspective has little meaning. You can’t magically wish the laws + all those guns away, and like in any arms race you can’t be entirely unarmed until you can enact a more permanent de-armament solution later.

              • @Tinidril@midwest.social
                link
                fedilink
                English
                45 months ago

                It’s actually a lot less common for regular citizens to open carry in the US than some might think from US News. It’s unusual in a protest, and almost always a far right thing. It has been used effectively by the left, but not at scale in the last 50 years.

                The most effective protest movements usually have two approaches going on at the same time, one that threatens violence, and one that is strictly non violent. Non violent movements tend to be ignored until negotiations with them are seen as more favorable than dealing with an armed movement.

          • @ubergeek@lemmy.today
            link
            fedilink
            English
            15 months ago

            Those cops will kill you, armed or not. Less likely, if armed.

            For example, see: DFW John Brown Gun Club shutting down cops who were looking to de-home a house less camp, by being armed and present.

              • @ubergeek@lemmy.today
                link
                fedilink
                English
                25 months ago

                I have you an example where it was the case.

                Another example are the BPP in Cali back in the day… the entire reason we have gun control laws in fact.

                • @HelixDab2@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  2
                  edit-2
                  5 months ago

                  Well, no. Not the entire reason. California resulted in the Mulford Act in '67 which banned open carry of firearms, but the Gun Control Act of '68 wasn’t directly related to it. The GCA was more about commerce in the wake of Kennedy’s assassination, because the Carcano rifle that Oswald used to assassinate Kennedy had been bought as mail order. (And note that the NRA was in favor of both at the time; it wasn’t until the 80s that the NRA took a hard turn to the right. They used to mostly be about marksmanship and hunting rather than political activism.) (Depending on whether or not 6.5mm Carcano ammunition is manufactured in the US, and isn’t readily available in the US, a 6.5mm Carcano rifle might be legally an antique and not subject to the GCA provisions, which is kind of ironic.) One of the effects of the GCA was to ban the importation of small, cheaply made, and readily concealed pistols; those regulations remain in effect today, and pistols that don’t pass a fairly extensive checklist can’t be imported. The GCA was preceded by the National Firearms Act of 1934, which had originally been intended to functionally ban handguns (which is why short barreled rifles and short barreled shotguns are part of the act), but that got stripped out prior to the vote. That’s the act that originally made it very expensive to own a machine gun, silencer, SBS/SBR (and still makes it a pain in the ass).

                  But, to your point, Reagan was the governor of California at the time, and he was a flaming racist (…who concealed it under ‘law and order’ and ‘welfare queen’ language), and the Black Panthers being armed freaked him the fuck out. he was responsible for signing the Firearm Owners Protection Act in '86, which did some good things as far as the now-activist NRA was concerned–like making it much easier to transport firearms across state lines–but also banned machine guns produced after 1986 from being transferred to private owners under the NFA of '34.

                  Really diving into the history of gun regulations and politics in the US is incredibly complicated and dense. There are bad actors on both sides–notably Michael A. Bellesiles and John Lott Jr.–so getting accurate information ends up being really hard.

    • @JasonDJ@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      2
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      I need a plugin like DownThemAll to just add every book on that page (including "Customers also bought…) to my Goodreads want to read.

      Narrative nonfiction has become my jam. New favorite category, especially history.

  • BombOmOm
    link
    fedilink
    English
    145 months ago

    Good. Gun rights are human rights. All people have the right to defend themselves and those around them. Taking that away by banning the only tool that evens the playing field is not OK.

  • Flying Squid
    link
    fedilink
    1025 months 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
        link
        fedilink
        15 months 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
          55 months 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

          • @octopus_ink@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            1
            edit-2
            5 months ago

            i put stock in the need to collectively hold the government accountable and fight tyranny

            It sounds good until the majority of gun owners in the country decide they like the tyranny.

              • @octopus_ink@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                English
                05 months ago

                Not whatsoever, but we’re in the US, where although some leftists are armed, the dominant gun culture isn’t going to come out to defeat tyranny, they will come out to defend it. If Trump goes full dictator, these hypothetical armed antifascists resistance fighters will have to fight their way through legions of y’allqaeda before the US military (who I desperately hope will not recognize Trump’s authority in such a circumstance) ever has to worry about them.

                • @WraithGear@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  3
                  edit-2
                  5 months ago

                  In that case, that sounds like the left needs to get weapons and become organized, like i recommend. And not turn over and assume that the majority will let them live free… as a treat.

                  You are basically arguing to give up and die because it’s too hard.

          • Flying Squid
            link
            fedilink
            -25 months 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
              35 months 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
                link
                fedilink
                -25 months 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
                  45 months 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.

      • 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.

          • VeganPizza69 Ⓥ
            link
            fedilink
            95 months ago

            I’d like it if indigenous Amazonians had better tools than bows to defend against loggers, ranchers, miners and various land grabbers. And a few SAMs to take care of those chemical airborne attacks.

        • @Not_mikey@slrpnk.net
          link
          fedilink
          235 months 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.

      • @zabadoh@ani.social
        link
        fedilink
        65 months ago

        That is historically true, unfortunately the conservative artificial supermajority Supreme Court doesn’t respect its own precedents and historical facts.

        • @WraithGear@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          45 months ago

          I mean the Supreme Court can say what they like. But their power is derived by the people. It can be taken back.

      • @pyre@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        9
        edit-2
        5 months 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
          45 months 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
            15 months 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
              1
              edit-2
              5 months 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.

          • @pyre@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            35 months ago

            what are you talking about? control over your own land is nothing like invading a remote country halfway around the world.

    • @CafeFrog@lemmy.cafe
      link
      fedilink
      English
      1
      edit-2
      5 months 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
      105 months 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
        link
        fedilink
        25 months ago

        That’s literally what I said:

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

    • TunaCowboy
      link
      fedilink
      65 months ago

      I think we agree that it is important to consider parallels in history, but the US is not 1930s Germany.

      • Flying Squid
        link
        fedilink
        105 months ago

        The U.S. is almost exactly like 1930s Germany in 1932. It’s not 1933 yet.

        • TunaCowboy
          link
          fedilink
          1
          edit-2
          5 months ago

          Germany is roughly 138,000 square miles in size, while the USA is approximately 4,000,000 square miles.

          The population of Germany in the 1930’s was roughly 60,000,000, the population of the US today, closer to 400,000,000.

          The US does not share an international border with 10 different countries.

          That’s just for starters. So while I agree there are parallels, there are a lot more differences that you’re not accounting for.

          • Flying Squid
            link
            fedilink
            55 months ago

            I don’t think you’re stupid and I think you’re able to read context, so why you’re pretending I wasn’t talking about the political atmosphere and playing this “well actually” game, I don’t know.

            • TunaCowboy
              link
              fedilink
              15 months ago

              I really don’t want to argue, and my original comment was a direct response to your assertion that armed resistance in the US (if warranted) is essentially futile.

              Again, yes there are parallels, which I continue to acknowledge, but the US is not Germany in a ton of relevant ways. Subsequently, a direct comparison between 1930’s Germany and 2025 US is inherently flawed, in regard to armed resistance - the main topic of your own original comment.

              Is it possible that while you were busy erroneously ad homineming me with an accusation of '‘well actually(ing)’ you, that it was you who missed context? Or are you pretending I wasn’t talking about the topic of the comment I replied to and playing a ‘well actually’ game?

              My reply to you was not hostile, why default to treating me adversarially? Why instead of discussing the topic that you brought up would you force me into this exhausting position? I believe you can do better than reddit tier.

  • @CaptPretentious@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    -115 months 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…

    • @ikidd@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      22
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      The far right have already armed themselves. Pacifists just end up at the bottom of the mass grave.

      As long as you have no better solution, then defending oneself is on the table. Nobody is talking about mass shootings, but when people are getting beaten up in the streets because the emboldened nazis are walking around feeling their oats, then maybe their intended victims should be given a chance to stay alive, even if it conflicts with your morals. Better judged by 12 than carried by 6.

    • @intensely_human@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      -25 months ago

      I get the idea of wanting to defend oneself, but that ultimately means a shootout.

      Study a concept called “deterrence”. It’ll blow your mind.

      It’s hardly going to matter who shot the first bullet in the history books.

      Generally speaking whoever shoots first lives while the other one dies. Above statement makes no sense?

      The far right

      Admit it. You only refer to “the far right” and never “the right”.

      are also going to arm themselves when they see other people arming themselves

      We’re already armed, in response to the other people who’ve been arming themselves for thousands of years. The world being a dangerous place is not something we are just discovering now.

      Do I have a better solution, no.

      Awareness is always a good first step to growth

      But more mass shootings isn’t going to be the answer.

      Buying a gun does not cause maas shootings to happen.

      And it’s only going to take one shootout before it’s used in a legal sense against people.

      ?? explain

      And guns aren’t going to be what’s made illegal in the United States, especially with a republican-controlled government…

      You guessed it. We republicans are going to make women illegal. Such clear headed insight on your part

    • @CafeFrog@lemmy.cafe
      link
      fedilink
      English
      15 months 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.

    • Cethin
      link
      fedilink
      English
      15 months ago

      I don’t like it, but we’ve made a fucked up situation. Likely the only way we get the momentum to fix it is if things get bad enough though, which I’m not encouraging just pointing out that a large segment of our society has a stupid concept of gun rights which isn’t actually in the constitution.

    • @skuzz@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      25 months ago

      A thing to maybe consider is to get a subscription at a range and check out a rental firearm to plink on the range. You lose some money in the experience like going to a movie or whatever, but you’re not out the full price of the firearm. Then you can decide how you feel. Granted, active fire is much different than object that sits on shelf. They’re quite docile when stationary. Even so, it’s just psychologically weird normalizing the thought of, “I have a device on this shelf that has only one purpose, to delete life.” Sure, hammers, nailguns, knives, etc. can be used for killing, but they have a useful primary purpose. Guns don’t.

    • @Cataphract@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      65 months 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.

    • @Fedizen@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      35 months ago

      I don’t own a gun and feel the same as you. I am leaning toward getting a gun safe and keeping the gun and ammo locked up and hidden. If it gathers dust that’s great, but having it there if I need it would be a comfort I think.

      • Liz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        35 months ago

        You do not want to have a gun that you’re not comfortable with. Having to deal with a high stress situation and then trying to use a gun when you don’t have brain-dead levels of familiarity with it is asking the trouble. Luckily it’s fairly cheap to build most of the muscle-memory with dry-fire and handling drills. But if you plan on using it for home defense or personal protection, you need to be prepared so that your mind can focus on other things during your troubles.

      • Skeezix
        link
        fedilink
        English
        15 months ago

        Comfort for what? An armed mob laying siege on your house? If someone breaks in unexpectedly are you going to ask him to wait while you open the safe?

        • @Fedizen@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          15 months ago

          I mean realistically, I think people who worry about burglars are paranoid and the armed mob scenario is also silly. i think its more about helping neighbors out if you see something crazy happening nearby.

    • @buttfarts@lemy.lol
      link
      fedilink
      35 months ago

      Take a reputable course and learn about guns. They are dangerous in the hands of irresponsible untrained yokels but if you are smart and informed they can empower you and safeguard your well being.

      Guns have traditionally been a pacifier for anxious right-wing weirdos who are afraid of Nancy Pelosi, but they are also a good hedge against those right-wing weirdos and will be a pacifier for your anxiety about them

    • @mlfh@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      85 months ago

      Training and familiarization helped me a lot with that exact feeling. I had the same feeling about circular/table saws. My dad was a carpenter, and those things freaked me the hell out - one tiny mistake could have devastating consequences, and that was all I could think about when I was around them. But with careful instruction and exposure, learing to use and be more comfortable with them, that feeling was gradually replaced by calm and confidence, and they changed in my mind from these objects of terror into valuable tools. There was still fear, but it was a healthy, respectful fear.

      I went through the exact same process with guns as well. Some classes with a good instructor, giving you a chance to get more comfortable and familiar before you bring a gun into your home, could help a lot.