You must log in or # to comment.
I’m not a big fan of guns, but I do love when marginalized people arm themselves
Same. It’s telling that Reagan supported Gun Control when it was the Black Panthers advising people to arm themselves. Even the NRA got in on the action.
Tell that to the 2a literalists who conveniently omit the entire opening - A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State.
We do not have a well regulated militia. Weapons are used to terrorize the people of these free states. Fuck
hmm, so we can campaign for queer and black people arming themselves, and worst case scenario we get gun control?
why are we not doing this?
worth a try.
Because it’ll be gun control done in such a way that marginalized communities like lgbtq+ and bipoc will be the ones who can’t get guns.
just for context, at the time it was written “a well regulated militia” meant all men old enough to fight that had their wits about them, regardless of their belonging to any organization including the military
Oh you were there?
When they wrote it, you were there so you understand the exact interpretation the founders intended?
no? you weren’t there? you’re not a 250 year old man?
so you’re speaking with the same conjecture the last 150+ years of jurists and scholars, which is, none really, whatsoever?
Yeah.
Please consider this - you have no expertise, no one does, and such expertise is immaterial because WE LIVE IN THE 21ST CENTURY AND FIREARMS HAVE CHANGES A LOT SINCE THEN.
So the opinions of the founders, while important, aren’t the decider.
Just like we didn’t decide NOT TO HAVE A FUCKING AIR FORCE because didn’t intend for it to happen.
I’m really tired of ‘originalist’ arguments that are idiotic and focused on one nuance or another of the document while throwing out the remainder.
Simply relaying my understanding of our government’s interpretation.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/10/246
Edit: When you fly off the handle making assumptions and parroting an unreal volume of completely unoriginal talking points, it does literally nothing other than embarrass yourself. You’re shitting all over your own argument by acting like a toddler with low blood sugar.
Edit 2: The fact that you throw this kind of tantrum when someone expresses sentiment that isn’t explicitly anti-gun on c/armedworkers is truly baffling. Do you go to c/barbecue to shriek about veganism?
I go where the argument needs to. I’m sick of idiots replying as if they knew themselves when it’s a bullshit argument top to bottom.
It wasn’t an argument until you decided to make it one. We could have had an actual conversation with the possibility of views changing but no. When you come out the gate with derision and anger you ensure that I only become more deeply entrenched in my views. I’m actually quite open to changing my mind on things and I find joy in the realization that I have an opportunity to realign my perspective closer to the truth.
The only reason I bother to type any of this shit is because you clearly want a better world. I want a better world too. Take my advice and cut the histrionics next time. I promise you the result will be much closer to what you desire.
My views aren’t changing. You obviously don’t care how many people are murdered, so I kinda doubt your premise bud.
Take my advice and just wake up, I promise you the world would be better if you assholes opened your eyes.
Marginalized people like literally anyone who might encounter the police in the US.
Yup!
I stand with the pretty flags and equality! I’m a minority in the south.
The fuck does that title even mean…
I interpret is as ‘people buy guns’…that’s it. The heck does ‘the right’ have to do with it. And why narrow it down to the alphabet soup. It’s just people…people bought guns. People go to the gun range. Gah I’m so sick of everything being these little fuck groups of individuals. We’re all human, stop micro labelling groups if you want unity. So sick of it all. Left, right, LGBTIQW, blacks, whites, boomers, genz…it’s all sickening.
The title is denoting that there was a rise in gun ownership among people who are not straight. What it has to do with the right is that gun ownership has always been a very common thing among that group, whereas it has not been common among the left and people who are not straight. It is pointing out a change in the status quo by juxtaposing the groups historical interests.
They didn’t use “People buy guns” as the title because that title doesn’t tell you the objective point of what the article is about and could mean too many other things.
I agree that in a perfect world where humanity is unified, we wouldn’t need such labels and could just use “people” for stuff like this, but it isn’t the world we live in right now unfortunately and the context is important to this specific articles content. When it’s possible to not use labels though, I agree, we shouldn’t.
Plenty of Democrats own guns, and way more liberals own guns. The ONLY reason gun ownership is so much more prevalent among Republicans than Democrats is that the Democratic party, and by extension many true believers, has been openly hostile to them for 4 decades now and taking every opportunity to disarm people.
I can’t speak to the situation in the United States, but in Canada in my experience, it is a different situation.
Canada is different. Canada never fought a war against the crown, and never followed that war by establishing a failsafe specifically preventing the government from having the ability to assert and enforce total control over the population.
Yes.
I understand why they used such specific terminology…to sell the article. It just bothers me that in this day and age someone who isn’t straight even needs to be classified as something other then a citizen, or a neighbour or what have you…
I’m just frustrated with everything in this world.
I agree, I am also frustrated with the world. It would be nice to see people work together again in a real way.
whereas it has not been common among the left and people who are not straight.
This has never been true except in the mind of liberals.
Regarding that statement I could only speak from personal experience, meaning my statement is as anecdotal as yours in this case so I have nothing more to say in response.
Except if you are actually in gun communities you will meet lots of leftists, whereas if you aren’t in gun communities you won’t meet anyone. Being personally ignorant isn’t the same as going out and becoming informed.
Except I own 3 firearms and have held a membership to my local gun range for several years and that is not the case where I am. Furthermore not only am I speaking to my experience in this as a firearms owner, but as a gay man, who has a lot of friends in the LGBTQ+ community.
Don’t make assumptions that I am not involved, or that everything is the same everywhere.
Divide and conquer (or something like that). And it works ^^’
So in the before times all my gun nut friends were pretty reliably right wing. I don’t think I know any left gun enthusiast folks.
Look up for local John Brown Gun Club or chapter of the Socialist Rifle Association
IDpol is all about atomization and alienation of the workers from each other. Gun rights have never been a right-wing thing despite the dem rhetoric.
I agree. Fuck the label people. They put a label on you to instruct others how to behave towards you. It’s metaphorically a handle. Nobody needs labels and they’re never used without ill intent.
who said they want unity? they don’t want unity. how will they peddle their dogshit propaganda if we aren’t there to lap it up and ask for seconds?
