Why don't protestors who oppose Trump/ICE open carry their guns to prevent what's currently occuring in the US ie kidnapping, assaults etc?
-
Are you fucking stupid?
Aiming a gun at a cop is significantly worse than brandishing. Why would I try to argue what you're saying unless I'm an idiot?
Oh, wait a minute. Gotta tap the sign.
Glad I stopped trying to find logic in the average person.
Also ignored. I know I won't be able to tolerate any more drivel from someone like you.
Keep going, you'll cum soon.
-
Best and simplest answer is that technically they're still considered law enforcement. Nearly everything they're doing is constitutionally illegal, but only the courts have the right to determine that.
If we start threatening police with guns, every single nook and cranny of our legal system justifies the police murdering us. Maybe some cops would get paid leave for a few weeks, or possibly even lose their badges, but that's about it.
And then they'll use it to justify an even more inflated budget for ICE, and everything will get exponentially worse.
So, cowardice. Gotcha.
-
So, cowardice. Gotcha.
I see u! How much are they paying you to ferment chaos?
-
So, cowardice. Gotcha.
It would just escalate things. A few armed confrontations one week and the next week it would be tanks and Apache helicopters. Cops love to escalate.
-
The answer is that people aren't willing to die in the tens of thousands to millions when they hope to unseat the scum in 26 ot 28
Those are absurdly unrealistic numbers but you're not wrong about the delusional hope of voting their way out keeping a bunch of people complacent for the moment
-
If you define failed movements as either "not wars" or "not dedicated", sure. A recent depressing example I am assuming is definitioned out of your view is Hong Kong, which is firmly under the control of mainland China. A slightly more distant example is Northern Ireland, which is firmly part of Britain.
wrote last edited by [email protected]Hong Kong was definitely not even close to a dedicated insurgency, in large part because the majority of the population appears to understand that they're better off with China than they ever would be with the UK. China never even came close to deploying tanks and bombs either, terrible example.
Northern Ireland was much more successful while they were still fighting, then popular support for the IRA waned due to concessions on the part of the UK because they could see they weren't going to win.
-
It's kind of like how many people are afraid of geese. An angry goose can give significant bruises and is basically impossible for an average person to restrain without killing the goose, so the only option is to run away. Because the easy win of breaking the goose's neck is not on the table for most people.
The US lost in Afghanistan because the goal was to turn it into a functioning democracy, and the local culture did not support that. If the goal had been "winning", the Army was entirely capable of slaughtering the large majority of the population and then importing settlers to numerically overwhelm the remnant population. Like our ancestors did to the Native Americans.
An insurgency vs an oppressive government is nothing at all like a pedestrian vs a goose, nobody has ever been killed by a goose. The goal was never to create a democracy in Afghanistan, it was just to plunder oil and opium. Wholesale unrestrained slaughter of the civilian population would have destroyed any plausible deniability about our actual goals and united the entire region far more effectively, giving us less time to loot. Also the US can't afford to slaughter our own population like we did to native americans because we need their labor for our economy to function.
-
See, and there it is. Zero to a hundred. It's either popcorn or civil war, no gradient.
I'm not the one who brought up not being able to fight against the military cause they have planes and tanks. No where in my replies have I suggested a civil war.
I mean, for one thing Nazi Germany also wasn't defeated by military cosplayers flashing their gun collection at them, and clearly neither was MAGA America.
Please go through my post history. I've been telling the left to arm themselves for decades now. This has nothing to do with maga, get that out of your head. The gravy seals would be the ones siding with the fascist.
The first one was defeated by a borderline apocalyptic global war, so... in the grand scheme both the military cosplay and the sternly worded letters are pretty much about just as effective there.
Which was fought and won with mostly small arms.
We're still waiting and seeing on the MAGA America part.
Not really. You seem to not live here, ICE is mostly made up from those magats...
But for another, plenty of nonviolent and/or unarmed protest has achieved its goals, historically. From Europe to India to South Africa to the actual United States. The "sternly worded letter" derision is pure action movie fantasy.
No one said to start a civil war. Still your missing the part that being armed can be peaceful. That's why I posted the link to 20k+ armed gun owners peacefully protesting gov overreach and cops left them the fuck alone.
This month alone the governments of Madagascar and Nepal came down after mass protests. Not a single set of camo pants in sight, just... you know, students organizing on social media and One Piece flags for some reason because this is a weird timeline.
They weren't even fully nonviolent, either. There were clashes, there was enforcement violence and dozens of people, mostly protestors, were killed in both countries. And still two governments came down and the situations continue to evolve and push for full regime change.
And burning gov buildings and killing their leaders... totally peaceful... way to contradict your point.
Meanwhile the example I'm being given is some American fascists standing on a street while cops that agree with them wait for them to get sleepy at their military cosplay convention and go home.
Again, it was peaceful because those same cops don't want to start shit and die for a paycheck. This example isn't there to show you that bringing guns to a protest magically makes things get done. I brought it up because left protesters are usually unarmed and are pushed around and arrested on bullshit.
I don't get Americans. I don't think the way they see the world as a culture makes sense, and I am terrified at how much they export it successfully through places like this. Nepal just held a full-on election over Discord and I still understand how that went down better than middle class America's political views.
The right is not being exported by just Americans, it's a growing movement in the world because of poorly educated people and social media.
Most of that is entirely absurd and not worth getting into. I'm sure a pedantic historian can nitpick it if that's the way everybody wants to go.
However, let me revisit your accusation of "contradicting my point". At no stage here have I conflated unarmed protest with peaceful protest. All along I've been frustrated by the US mindrot tendency of accepting no nuance between some My Little Pony version of political action and outright armed confrontation. The worldwide protests that show how bonkers the US perception of the issue is were not peaceful, but neither were they an armed confrontation where protestors attempted to use their armed might to deter police forces. They were... you know, political action. Civil unrest. "Civil" being the key word.
The way you and US leftists in general tend to parse stuff like this is nonsense. The fact that mass protests can escalate to the point they went in Nepal, Madagascar or any of the countries in the general "Gen Z spring" movement and prior protest waves disproves the US perspective because a) it has nothing to do with the level of access to weapons, and b) it shows sufficiently commited public action doesn't have to be either fully nonviolent or an armed insurrection.
Americans look at this as some form ot guarantee their success by either intimidating the other into submission or hoping that the other side will fold immediately. That's not how this goes. "The cops may charge at us, we should bring guns" is some weird overlap of thinking protestors are entitled to painless victory and that there is no possible pressure beyond violent pressure. It makes no sense to me. And yet, here we are, a bunch of posts down the line.
-
Is this not the reason the second amendment exists?
Regards
An Australian
Edit: I'm not advocating for violence. More so "a well regulated militia" which could be established by protesters or Democratic Governors for genuine self defence.Protesters who use violence to protect their neighbors will be killed. This is fascism. We can't use force to defend ourselves.
-
It would just escalate things. A few armed confrontations one week and the next week it would be tanks and Apache helicopters. Cops love to escalate.
They're escalating anyway, in the absence of an actual justification they just make shit up and everyone knows it, refusing to actually resist them accomplishes absolutely nothing
-
I see u! How much are they paying you to ferment chaos?
*foment, dumbass
-
No shit. That's the problem. You bring your friends and the cops will bring their tanks. Then what, have a dick measuring contest?
... Oh wait, they'll gun you all down and laugh about it instead.
So yeah, guns can be used, but let's not pretend flexing your firearm in public will easily accomplish your goal. Be thoughtful and careful about when and where.
Well, 20$ drone go brrr
-
Hong Kong was definitely not even close to a dedicated insurgency, in large part because the majority of the population appears to understand that they're better off with China than they ever would be with the UK. China never even came close to deploying tanks and bombs either, terrible example.
Northern Ireland was much more successful while they were still fighting, then popular support for the IRA waned due to concessions on the part of the UK because they could see they weren't going to win.
They folded under pressure, they knew they were dealing with the risk of being disappeared.
-
They folded under pressure, they knew they were dealing with the risk of being disappeared.
Cool story
-
Cool story
Ok, gotcha.
+150 social credit points!
-
Ok, gotcha.
+150 social credit points!
Lol really living up to your username bud
-
Lol really living up to your username bud
You already won, China just needs to wait, and pick up the ashes. All your competition just killing itself.
Tf you want? Why not just stop pretending, go mask off, declare to everyone whatever the truth is? Why play around, no insurrection is possible.
-
*foment, dumbass
wrote last edited by [email protected]So you understood what I was getting at? Language is descriptive, not proscriptive. People who make fun of others for jargon or misuse typically don't have much going for their argument or position.
Also, see here: https://www.dailywritingtips.com/ferment-and-foment/
-
It would just escalate things. A few armed confrontations one week and the next week it would be tanks and Apache helicopters. Cops love to escalate.
Escalation seems to be needed. This is what America's 2nd amendment is supposed to be used for.
Bunch of hypocrites.
-
We may reach that point.
We should try a general strike first. We don't even need to combine it with protests. We just have everyone stay home and refuse to work. You can fight the government by playing old video games or watching TV.
The only significant general strike planned right now happens in 2028 from the Auto Workers Union.
