this post was submitted on 05 Oct 2023
325 points (95.8% liked)

politics

19144 readers
5938 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] deegeese@sopuli.xyz 134 points 1 year ago (10 children)

Why do we allow so many terrorists to own guns?

If you use a gun to commit a crime, you should lose the right to own guns forever.

[–] Fredselfish@lemmy.world 40 points 1 year ago (7 children)

Maybe, just Maybe if one of these fucking right wing nuts take out a politician then watch real quick we will get new gun laws. Long as they shooting up schools, and churches and hurting us common folk nothing will change.

[–] ivanafterall@kbin.social 49 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Gabby Giffords? Congressional baseball shooting?

[–] 1024_Kibibytes@lemm.ee 14 points 1 year ago (1 children)

And Steve Scalice's shooting?

[–] TransplantedSconie@lemm.ee 11 points 1 year ago (1 children)

That was the baseball one.

[–] 1024_Kibibytes@lemm.ee 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Thanks for the reminder. I thought it was a congressional baseball game. How these people literally get shot and still don't see the need for reform, I don't understand.

[–] TransplantedSconie@lemm.ee 7 points 1 year ago

Hey, I'll have you know a few feet of your lower intestine, part of your colon, and almost dying is a small price to pay when you can insider trade and rake in that sweet sweet NRA money

[–] commandar@kbin.social 31 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (7 children)

Easiest way to kickstart it is arming at-risk minorities.

California's strict gun laws have their roots in white conservatives' reaction to the Black Panthers marching with rifles while St. Reagan was governor of the state.

The upside of this strategy is that if the gun laws don't change, then at least those minorities will have some means of protecting themselves.

[–] seaQueue@lemmy.world 26 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

+1, if anyone wants to know why California has such restrictive gun laws those started in response to the Black Panthers policing our cops.

Edit: https://firearmslaw.duke.edu/2020/04/the-black-panthers-nra-ronald-reagan-armed-extremists-and-the-second-amendment/

So, yeah, have black people show up with ARs in some state capitols and you'll kickstart gun control right quick. Arming liberal women, gays and trans people in red states and having them show up at the capitol might work too.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
[–] Hazzia@discuss.tchncs.de 21 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

I would say "only if that politician was Republican" but based on their response to Jan 6 I unfortunately have to think that even then they wouldn't budge

[–] PetDinosaurs@lemmy.world 11 points 1 year ago

If a Republican politician were taken out, it would be open season on Democrats.

[–] athos77@kbin.social 20 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

If they kill a Democrat, the right will just cheer. If they kill a Republican, the right will proclaim loud and long how this proves they're the victims of violent Democrats and it'll get brought up for years to "both sides" political violence, the way that the Congressional baseball game shooting is today. Plus the more deranged part of the base wall immediately create new conspiracy theories about how it wasn't really a Republican/right-winger that did the shooting, it was a left-wing antifa/FBI plant controlled by George Soros, Bill Gates and Tom Hanks using the space lasers to control their 5G+vaccine zombie trial and now that the trial run has succeeded you all need to be aware because the civil defense sirens will sound at 10pm next Tuesday and that's the signal for the National Guard to come through and scour the neighborhood and arrest everyone and intern then into FEMA camps.

Edit: fix autocorrect words

[–] partial_accumen@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

If they kill a Republican, the right will official loud and long hours this proves they’re the victims

....and then pass rules that Republicans politicians at all levels be exempt from any gun restrictions, even on someone else's private property. They would proudly wear hip holsters onto the House floor during debate and claim that is the only way they can be safe. The first shooting victim on the House floor will be a person of color from a Republican gun.

If it happens to be a radical from the left that does the initial killing, then there's even a possibility Republicans would support gun restrictions on Democrats.

Remember, the conservative answer to too much gun violence is always adding additional guns.

[–] ShaggySnacks@lemmy.myserv.one 4 points 1 year ago

I am going to have to deduct points there. You forgot to add in Hunter Biden and laptop into your well developed right wing conspiracy theory.

[–] Falumir@kbin.social 12 points 1 year ago

No definitely not. They didn't do anything after Gabby Giffords was shot back in 2011, they're not going to now.

[–] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago

Only if it's a Republican politician that is not considered a "RINO".

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] giantofthenorth@lemm.ee 29 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Maybe not 100% of the time but at least 80-90% of the time it's always the police, or DA failing to do their job properly. If you're pending a felony trial you cannot own/buy guns until you're proven innocent, and they should be confiscated. I cannot imagine how this man would not be chargeable.

Similar goes for many shootings, they plea down to a lesser charge or the cops just don't do their job and let go obvious crimes.

[–] RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Can’t keep your position as a sheriff or DA who are always “tough on crime”. When you start holding right wing gun owners to the law they get upset and won’t vote for you. They’re the ones most punishment-happy and also simultaneously hold themselves above the law, as events over the last several years should obviously indicate.

[–] pimento64@sopuli.xyz 20 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Which will promptly turn in to

As you can see, the defendant, a biological MAN in a dress, was carrying a pistol in HIS purse when HE tried to invade a women's bathroom to express HIS sick gender delusion. I ask the fine Texans of this jury, would you let this sick MAN rape your daughters at gunpoint?

I'm not making a sophistical argument, they already do this. It's just that they currently focus more on codewords like "thug" to make sure a black man who had three joints in his house can never vote again. If you want gun control, arm every LGBT person in the country and Republicans will ban everything more advanced than a rubber band shooter the very next day, just like how the first sweeping gun control legislation was instituted by then-Governor Reagan to keep the Black Panthers down.

[–] deegeese@sopuli.xyz 9 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Texas will legalize biracial transgender lesbian atheists before Texas starts actually taking people’s guns away.

[–] pimento64@sopuli.xyz 15 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Texas takes (usually black) people's guns away all the time, they're not even close to having the most permissive gun laws in the country. As with all things Republicans do, Texan gun culture is massively hypocritical to fulfill a racist double standard.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Jaysyn@kbin.social 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Those are already legal according to the Constitution.

[–] deegeese@sopuli.xyz 7 points 1 year ago

Not according to the Republican Party

[–] Ragdoll_X@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I’m not making a sophistical argument, they already do this.

Sadly you're 100% correct. They cling to the bathroom panic even though their arguments have basically no basis whatsoever in reality. Even the "Family Research Council", a religious right-wing think-tank, was only able to find 23 cases of “bathroom incidents” over the span of 18 years - most of which involved cis men, not trans women or even crossdressers, and two cases of discrimination against trans women who were just using the bathroom. Plus in one case a conservative man entered the women's changing room when KIDS were changing to "make a point" about a nondiscrimination law that was recently passed. Everything these creeps claim the left is doing is always just projection.

Meanwhile states that discriminate against trans students have the same rate of sexual assault as other states, and trans teens are much more likely to be victims of assault, especially when they're denied access to facilities that match their identity:

[–] PoliticalAgitator@lemm.ee 16 points 1 year ago

Why do we allow so many terrorists to own guns?

Gun lobby: "$500 is $500“

[–] MeanEYE@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago (4 children)

Kind of self-explanatory. People who are willing to commit crime with guns also don't care if law forbids them owning one.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] iegod@lemm.ee 4 points 1 year ago

Should not even be a right to begin with.

[–] meco03211@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The trouble with that is you cannot be deprived of rights without due process. You cannot be guilty of committing a crime with a gun without having gone to trial or plead out. It would be highly unlikely to get some law pushed through that survives both NRA opposition/propaganda and the inevitable SCOTUS case.

Bail could be used if they still pose a risk, but that's not entirely the point of bail and would also see heavy opposition.

[–] BrianTheeBiscuiteer@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Due process doesn't mean found guilty in a court of law. If that's what it meant then nobody could be held in jail or in police custody even before their trial. If you are booked for a felony, especially one involving a gun, I believe it's perfectly reasonable to have your guns taken temporarily or permanently if you're found guilty of a felony offense.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Dkarma@lemmy.world 65 points 1 year ago (1 children)

More republican terrorists every day.

[–] argo_yamato@lemm.ee 20 points 1 year ago

Yeah just a normal republican anymore

[–] Nougat@kbin.social 44 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The man ... approached the governor’s office on the first floor of the Capitol around 2 p.m. ... He returned to the outside of the Capitol shortly before 9 p.m. ...

This guy first shows up at 2p. Gets arrested, taken to the station, put in jail in Madison, posts bail, goes and gets the rifle, and is back at the Capitol again within seven hours? This almost smacks of the police and jail working really hard to make sure this guy got booked, processed, and released as quickly as possible.

Some of those that burn crosses are the same that work forces.

[–] jordanlund@lemmy.world 14 points 1 year ago

FTA:

"The man said “he did not own a vehicle and it is likely he has access to a large amount of weapons and is comfortable using them,” police said in the bulletin sent to Capitol workers."

Arrested at 2 PM in the capitol:

2 E Main St, Madison, WI 53703

Taken to Dane County Jail and processed:

115 W Doty St, Madison, WI 53703

Back to the capitol at 9 PM.

Now, granted, it's a 5 minute walk from the jail to the capitol, but still, without a car he had the ability to get an assault rifle and go back?

I feel safe in saying he didn't hop on public transportation carrying an AR. Maybe he had it in a bag?

[–] hoanbridgetroll@midwest.social 43 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The man was taken into custody for openly carrying a firearm in the Capitol, which is against the law, Warrick said. Weapons can be brought into the Capitol if they are concealed and the person has a valid permit. The man arrested did not have a concealed carry permit, Warrick said.

The crime wasn’t being a raving lunatic with a gun - it was the lack of paperwork and a shirt to conceal it!

This is why we need new legislative maps in Wisconsin.

[–] BrianTheeBiscuiteer@lemmy.world 12 points 1 year ago

It wasn't a Nerf gun, he was carrying a deadly weapon. If you're too stupid to get a permit or leave your weapon in the car I don't think you're responsible enough to own a gun.

[–] spider@lemmy.nz 27 points 1 year ago

Gov. Evers should pull a DeSantis: Put the guy on a plane, fly him down to Florida and dump him there.

[–] YoBuckStopsHere@lemmy.world 16 points 1 year ago

Perhaps, like many, this individual has too much access to firearms.

[–] PeleSpirit@lemmy.world 16 points 1 year ago (9 children)

I read the tldr and thought the guy with the gun was a democrat. I thought it was weird that they took him in and aren't releasing his name. Then I read the article and realized the governor is a democrat and it all makes sense now.

[–] tacosplease@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago

A bunch of right wing nutjobs tried to kidnap her a while back too.

load more comments (8 replies)
[–] Wheels@universeodon.com 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] YoBuckStopsHere@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago (9 children)

Bulldozer with iron plates welded onto it?

load more comments (9 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›