I personally like to use it on the chuds who think Reagan said it and then watch them hurt themselves in confusion when they realize it was Karl.

full context is [a] militia

lmao @ the Marx quote getting the same stretch as the 2nd Amendment gets in US politics.

I don't think it is that simple because you are assuming the people on the other end of that exchange will understand the nuance you mention when the reality is that there is a mistaken assumption that socialists are against violence and guns because these are right wing traits. I think there was a variation of that old meme that communists want to take your freedoms, your toothbrush, your guns etc...

When you throw the Marx quote around it should in the face of a lib in a bigger argument that you are NOT in fact on their side inherently(they take all leftists for granted mistaking real life for electorialism so they expect everyone to fall in line) just because you may agree things like school shootings are bad it doesn't mean you'll go around supporting whatever shitty pacifistic disarmament Democrat ideology and the broader picture of violence goes far beyond who gets access to guns or not.

They get to play the role of someone who is preoccupied with crime and violence while doing literally nothing to materially change society to actually reduce crime(e.g poverty alleviation) and they want to shame you into accepting their solution to the status quo i.e guns bad, guns in the hands of "problematic" people also bad etc.

The shit they pulled during the Floyd protests, all the civility anti-rioting/looting shit. They'll never be on our side, when the time comes they'll make sure that carrying a bottle or a stone will be as bad as a gun.

IMO I think you could make a reasonable list of vulnerable people who are never going to fight in a revolution so they don't need to be anywhere near a gun and that is fine and uncontroversial.

But from what I see sometimes there are people who genuinely believe in disarmament and want to go all the way if they could which is definitely Marx quote time.

I agree but I see it as strategically useful to ignore that context. It is simply rational to come to the conclusion that the proletariat must be armed in order to achieve revolution and the primary stumbling block of every attempt at any uprisings is usually "how do we get armed?" in countries where a high prevalence of weapons is not the norm. Without someone like the USSR to do the arming it's very important to promote.

Damn bro, good hot take. Burnt me with it

The funny thing is that the Engels preface of the struggles in France also says that way of thinking became outdated.