Huh, I wonder why he had to specify both “free” and “man.”
4 Likes
That is good advice, and I can laugh at myself more than most people. I didn’t even flag or report or lash back when someone predicted I’d end up shooting myself, have a loved one shoot themselves, or end up as a mass shooter.
It looks like something that you would find a Boy Scout badge. Like for orienteering or something.
Buy yeah, goddamn it.
1 Like
I did, because that just wasn’t cool.
4 Likes
Funny the posters drawn to these topics, eh?
7 Likes
I’ll give a Yeehaw!!! to that. le sigh.
I think when Obama was elected it was the first time that a black woman slept in the White House since Sally Hemmings.
shooting at a cop—even one who was in the wrong—is almost never going to make your situation better.
I agree, but your “almost” qualification is important.
Almost??? I am having trouble thinking of any situation where shooting at a cop makes your situation better. Shooting at a law officer pretty much automatically puts you in the “bad guy” category, no matter if you think you are defending yourself or if you have not yet committed a crime. Adrenaline pumped police officers will do whatever they can to take down the “bad guy” once identified. It is what we hired and trained them to do.
Even pointing a gun at a cop is enough to make them think you have done something wrong and the situation will escalate from there. So, I don’t see how guns could ever protect you from bad law enforcement.
1 Like
Of course. Shooting at the police is never allowed. And the authorities will generally seek to kill the shooter. But, tv tropes notwithstanding, the cops don’t always get their man. The authorities are not invincible, their power is not inescapable.
People have shot at the police and gotten away with it, and indeed even benefited from it. Doing so has saved lives. It has established zones of autonomy which are safe from incursion by unaccountable police forces.
These cases are pretty rare compared to the ones which end in death and tragedy all around. That’s why I would agree that it’s almost never a good idea to shoot at police. But the exceptions are important, specifically because they inspire such vehement disbelief and discomfort.
Your militia in Oregon is missing you.
You suggest that only ultra-right survivalist weirdos would even entertain the question of armed resistance to the police. I think that discourse is dated and losing ground quickly.
By refusing to even engage the question and basically writing us off as crazies, the establishment left is further isolating itself from the genuine liberatory leftist tendencies in society and hardening its identity as the “left hand of power”.
That’s what’s so clever about the Yes Men’s stunt. It does this “haha only serious” move while suggesting that young black men be armed against the police, bringing out this contradiction in a way that lets us consider it without raising everyone’s hackles with a serious proposal. Their approach is definitely better than my more earnest and direct one 
1 Like
Yes, I dismiss right-wing AnCaps who pretend to be crusties as well.
I have little interest in someone’s violent masturbatory fantasies guised as Revolution, nor are you trustworthy to not turn your guns on us leftists even if you gained power.
But really, these invented, fictional scenarios may impress someone in your Bitcoin meetup group but they’re not appealing to anyone in the context here of discussing murder sprees.
I’ve worked with a few local anarchist and ultra local community groups and none of them have the lustful violence boner that you do. They’re more interested in doing the most they can, you’re interested in martyrdom and these Walter Mitty fantasies.
Wrong again, you have one guess remaining! But I guess that does explain the attitude, because ancaps are pretty irritating.
Again incorrect, but I can understand the mistake. The person you’re arguing with seems pretty insufferable, I would probably want to take them down a notch too! Unfortunately for both of us, they’re not me. Maybe our time trying to communicate has been wasted, being conceived under faulty assumptions. Oh well, maybe next time!
I just don’t get the bravado and righteous glee at your proposed, fictional scenario where Brave US citizens get into firefights with law enforcement officers and thus helped… anyone.
It’s particularly uncommon outside of survivalist reactionaries. There’s scenarios like Peltier and the AIM, however Pine Ridge wasn’t a net gain either.
Whatever you’re trying to promote, you certainly left it open to interpretation and lacked any substance.
This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.
