• FuckyWucky [none/use name]
    ·
    2 years ago

    in the land of the guns, marginalized people should've guns. however, self-defense is less than "ideal" especially with guns because of how easy it is to get shot and killed.

    • mkultrawide [any]
      ·
      2 years ago

      I'm not sure what you mean. Guns level the playing field in a fight more than pretty much anything else. Like give a 12 year old girl a baby Glock and she can kill a 6'5" roided out meathead.

      • FuckyWucky [none/use name]
        ·
        2 years ago

        if you are in America, its very likely that the Nazi also has a gun. also, under stress, people can't think straight and may not be able to get the gun out and shoot the other person fast enough. its not like video games where you can just right click point and click heads.

        • BeamBrain [he/him]
          ·
          2 years ago

          its not like video games

          Unless the video game is Receiver 2

          This isn't an argument, I just like talking about Receiver 2

        • mkultrawide [any]
          ·
          edit-2
          2 years ago

          Nazis likely having a gun is just another reason to have a gun. The under stress thing goes both ways, as well. And if guns are that hard to kill people with that people can't get a shot of, then why does anyone want to ban them? No one said anything about this being a video game.

      • happybadger [he/him]
        ·
        2 years ago

        Oh come on, 12 year-olds have much better guns in this country. AR-15s at least.

      • Frank [he/him, he/him]
        ·
        2 years ago

        It's largely not even about fighting. Kkkrackers are really brave as long as they're the only ones armed, but if they see a few people with rifles they suddenly decide discretion is the better part of valor. Like deterrence is a real consideration that should be taken seriously. Driving a truck in to a crowd when the perimeter security people all have ARs is a very different proposition from attacking an unarmed crowd.

      • silent_water [she/her]
        ·
        2 years ago

        one on one maybe. but if you kill one of them, what are the odds the cops side with you, the trans person, instead of the dead person, and don't hunt you down? what are the odds you live to see a court date?

      • Fuckass
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        deleted by creator

    • Frank [he/him, he/him]
      ·
      2 years ago

      "This nonviolent stuff will get you killed" and the uprising in 2020 were both eye openers. When people marched they weren't carrying, but a lot of people during civil rights were strapped. Non-violence was a tactic, not a suicide pact. King often had a lot of people staying wherever he was staying, strapped up, to dissuade the klan from attacking in the night. A repeated theme was that the sncc kids weren't armed but the people who were hosting them often were, with the attitude of "we're not going to let the klan kill these nice kids without a fight".

      Same thing in 2020. Like don't get me wrong, there were no heroic self defense shootings. But everyone was strapped. I have never seen so many rifles and pistols outside of a shooting range. Whatever liberals think about it people have guns. They might even have helped dissuade attacks - we got video of a cop shaped white guy getting out of his car a few blocks from a protest camp, unloading a glock in to the air, and driving away. The thinking was cops or yakubians were doing it to heighten terror. And the cops wouldn't come near us unless they had 40 cops with rifles bc they were afraid of getting lit up.

      We're not dealing with a safe, sane, reasonable world where level heads and well phrased arguments will prevail. People complaining about armed minorities and leftists have an inaccurate view of how politics is conducted in America.