politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- 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:
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
Weird thing is this is the “government takeover” the 2nd amendment nuts have been screaming about for generations. Not at all surprised that they’re mostly silent now. Also not at all surprised it their own political party who’s doing this.
I keep seeing this take and it's half thought out at best. First of all, I don't think it's true. There are plenty of armed citizens not sympathetic to ICE in any way. They are reasonable adults who have not felt it necessary up to this point to engage in a last resort effort that is likely to endanger tens of thousands of people at minimum. You may think we are already past that point, and we may well be, but you can't deny that wanting to be sure it is necessary before taking up arms against their countrymen is exactly what a reasonable adult with a firearm should do.
Second, if what you are saying is true and there are no reasonable citizens with guns then the logical course of action is to buy a gun, organize in your community, and practice your 2nd Amendment rights as you see fit. They don't just apply to conservatives despite what Bovino is trying to argue. Complaining about the past isn't going to change the future so if you see a gap, fill it.
Now I don't know if you're American or not but I do see this sentiment from Americans on a regular basis and that is who am I addressing.
I don't think they meant "all gun owning citizens" when they said "2nd amendment nuts". I think they were talking about a particular type of person who bases their whole identity around owning guns to fight against the government.
I don’t think he’s saying the second amendment tells you use your guns to shoot people when there is anything you consider tyrannical government oppression, only that having the guns are supposed to preempt that problem in theory — and the theory is clearly invalidated.
The fact that traditional second amendment proponents (the NRA) have backed away from that theory and now side with the proto fascist tyrannical government demonstrates the argument was always bankrupt and was never a principle in practice.
That said — you correctly point out that there still room for people to actually start using said guns for shooting, which is indeed the logical next step. Putin is shitting himself laughing.
Fire extinguishers don't ward off fires. You need to actually use them after the fire has started. The same goes with firearms and tyranny. They don't prevent it, but they can be used against it.
Fires don't fear you rising up against them
Guess that's why you have to actually use the fire extinguisher?
Exactly. The fire isn't going to think "gee sure are a lot of folks with extinguishers out there, I better not start burning anything or they'll kill me". Unless you elect a really stupid fire that knows it's going to be dead soon anyway and will never face consequences.
These people have been led around by the nose their whole lives. The same people who have been shouting this nonsense at the 2nd losers are the ones who were inevitably going to pull this.
No no no. You're thinking of the Civil Rights Act. That's what they were complaining about.
Cf Reagan and California’s gun control laws.