Don’t always is a significant difference from haven’t ever in 240 years.
Do you ever get the feeling that some people can’t actually distinguish reality from fiction?
Hence all the freakouts and panic; when the ONLY thing someone has in their favor is manufactured privilege, they’ll fight tooth and nail to preserve it.
Enumerated. Listed, not granted by the government.
And if you do need a gun to fight for domestic democracy, you are not defending it–you’re trying to reclaim it.
One could argue that reclaiming democracy started the second after the Constitution was signed.
Those aren’t my comments you quoted.
Again, when the only thing someone has going for them in life is the manufactured construct of privilege, they will go through hell and high water to try to preserve it.
From rabid fanboys who are pissed off about a female Doctor Who to 45’s supporters who think that gouging welfare and Medicaid will only hurt poor people of color and not them as well, the fear is real.
You know the movie Starship Troopers was actually intended as satire, right?
Which means that they probably closed most of the loopholes behind them. Other problems would be the effective gun company control, and the foggy membership numbers.
It’s more an urban/rural thing, and that used to be somewhat orthogonal to left/right, but has become a much better proxy for left/right in recent years.
Damn straight. Not only is buying everything you can used a fine way to opt out of the organised madness that is the so-called ‘economy’, but while you’re also saving money, you’re preserving resources to boot.
Then there’s the fact that since so much stuff we buy is plastic and/or brominated-flame-retarded whatever sitting inside our homes, buying used means a shitload less toxic offgassing for you and your kids to inhale.
You have repeatedly claimed that private gun ownership is a requirement for preserving a number of rights that exist in many other countries, the vast majority of which do not guarantee a right to private gun ownership.
No. I haven’t. I’ve claimed that violence created stable society, and violence or the threat of violence preserves it. I’ve claimed that the left should embrace gun ownership for that reason.
You’ll note that gun-less England still has police.
You’ll note that Ukraine lost their nukes and will slowly be annexed to Russia.
If anything YOU are the one ignoring how society, countries, borders & cultures work.
Violence made them. Violence defends them.
I honestly have no idea what you are talking about. My language isn’t direct and strong enough? I guess my attempt at being non aggressive has come off as weasely? Maybe you can rewrite my statement in the voice you feel is more correct to illustrate what you mean in a way I can understand it.
I agree that the right has glommed onto the issue and it has been used as a political wedge. My statement is that it SHOULDN’T be that way. IMO a lot of “liberals” have this stance because the “conservatives” have the opposite stance, and vice versa (of course not ALL of them).
Another example with in a similar vein is the anti-environment stance many conservatives vocally take, even though many of them enjoy the outdoors, contribute to conservation, and in rural areas also invest habitat building, soil and water conservation, and other pro-environment activities. Yet they complain about the EPA or Climate Change being a hoax. Their anti stance seems more because of the political line drawn, vs something against their actual ideals.
The US has areas of crippling poverty, government corruption, systemic government racism and classism, class segregation, and a militant war on drugs that fuels mass incarceration. While lacking Canada’s national health system, generally better public transportation, and (depending who’s stats you read) has only about ~5% in poverty vs ~15-16% of Americans.
Maybe we have more in common with the neighbors to the South with the neighbors to the North. But hey, maybe not.
Back to the point of the article, I welcome any “leftists” wanting to learn more about or own firearms. I hope they join the NRA or one of the many other smaller rights org, as well as pay for training and self educate for safe handling etc. If anyone wants general info, feel free to PM.
Hmm… I’d say that’s part of the truth. It’s hard to be heard when you don’t swing a big stick.
But I think we’ve been moving towards an improvement on that paradigm for a while, at least until relatively recently. Sure would be nice if we didn’t give up on that ambition.
Black gun ownership, carry, now at an all -time high, thanks largely to Shall issue carry laws, as opposed to “may issue” ones supported by white supremacists like Bloomberg and his “Everytown”.
Citation from a verifiable source, please.
And once you’ve provided that, maybe then we can talk about how often owning a firearm has actually prevented Black people from being shot and killed, instead of just giving the shooter a “legitimate” excuse to play judge jury and executioner.
Bad idea is BAD:
Black people are not shields, ‘walking targets’ or pawns; and the suggestion that we should make ourselves into such is a piss poor one.
And those areas tend to have gun death rates on par with (or higher than) Central American countries.
For example, the State of Arkansas has a firearm death rate of 23.3 people per 100,000 annually while drug-cartel-ravaged Columbia weighs in at only 18.65 firearm deaths per 100,000.
The national average for firearm death rates between the U.S. and Mexico is 11.96 to 7.64, respectively (though Mexico does have a marginally higher homicide rate). So even comparing the United States to our neighbors to the South we don’t come off looking particularly good.
Sure, you cherry pick our worst part, it is going to look worst than their whole.
Conversely you cherry pick our best parts, it is going to look better than the UK as or Canada as a whole.