this post was submitted on 25 Jan 2026
492 points (99.6% liked)

politics

27435 readers
3260 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. 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:

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.
  4. 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.
  5. 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

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

A number of pro-gun rights Republicans pushed back on the administration's argument that Alex Pretti was dangerous because he had a gun. Pretti was legally licensed to carry one.

A war of words over deeply held beliefs erupted on the political right in the hours after a federal agent shot and killed Alex Pretti on a Minneapolis street Saturday, pitting top officials in Donald Trump’s administration against Second Amendment defenders in his electoral base.

At the core of the debate is that Pretti — who was permitted to carry a gun in public in Minnesota — had a concealed firearm on his person that eyewitness videos show federal agents apparently discovering and removing during the altercation that led to his death. Videos do not appear to show Pretti holding the weapon during that confrontation.

Kristi Noem sought to justify the killing by asserting at a news conference that Pretti “attacked those officers, had a weapon on him, and multiple dozens of rounds of ammunition, wishing to inflict harm on these officers coming, brandishing like that and impeding their work that they were doing.” No evidence has been provided to back up this account.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Bubbaonthebeach@lemmy.ca 6 points 2 hours ago

Mega supporters might be coming to the realization that Trump and his fascist machinery will turn on them as fast as they have on anyone else. They don't have any power and as soon as the easier targets are gone that bullseye will switch to them. Probably will lose their cherished guns and "right to battle tyranny and govt outreach" long before they truly understand what they have willingly handed over to Trump and Co.

[–] DarkFuture@lemmy.world 7 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

Psst.

It's because black people are open carrying.

Just like the last time Republicans started talking about gun control when black people started open carrying.

Psst.

The American conservative movement is a racist movement.

[–] Gammelfisch@lemmy.world 4 points 1 hour ago

Spot on! Ask Ronnie Motherfuck Reagan about your comment. California used to be open carry until 1968 (?). The Black Panthers were protesting and marched into the state capitol building with their rifles and pistols. Ron and a senator shit their racist pants and changed the gun laws.

[–] Subtracty@lemmy.world 17 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

How many kids had to die in school shootings in order to protect these 2A rights? But a holstered weapon is suddenly a threat to 6 men armed to the teeth and wearing body armor.

[–] DarkFuture@lemmy.world 7 points 2 hours ago* (last edited 2 hours ago)

But a holstered weapon is suddenly a threat

Couldn't have been a threat. It was removed from his possession before he was executed.

[–] caboose2006@lemmy.world 3 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

I'm summoning the NRA to do some good for once

[–] W3dd1e@lemmy.zip 9 points 5 hours ago

They already issued a milquetoast response on it and republicans are siding with Noem even tho it’s nonsense.

It doesn’t matter what these clowns do. That cult of MAGA can do no wrong in their eyes. Greg Bovino could arrest Jesus for coming to the US illegally during the Second Coming and the conservatives would applaud him for getting rid of another illegal.

[–] Someone8765210932@lemmy.world 7 points 8 hours ago

Anyone who is even the slightest bit surprised by this wasn't paying attention.

[–] TronBronson@lemmy.world 7 points 9 hours ago

Everyone in the trump admin is acting like the 2A will get you killed by them. They’re not violating the right they’re just murdering in tangent

[–] PointyFluff@lemmy.ml 4 points 10 hours ago

Treat her like she treats puppies.

[–] elucubra@sopuli.xyz 16 points 15 hours ago (1 children)

What is it that you people don't understand about "The right's right to bear arms shall not be infringed"?

Maybe you should take a course to read good.

[–] ShaggySnacks@lemmy.myserv.one 4 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

I went to the Derek Zoolander's Center For Kids Who Can't Read Good. Turned my life around.

[–] hperrin@lemmy.ca 1 points 6 hours ago

The one for ants?

[–] thermal_shock@lemmy.world 35 points 18 hours ago (3 children)
[–] madcaesar@lemmy.world 2 points 2 hours ago (3 children)

For the record, liberals need to open carry like these dudes here.

Again, Democrats try to play nice, concealed, holstered weapons, instead of wearing full body Armor with ar15.

I guarantee you no ice pussy would attack them, becuase they'd be afraid.

[–] BigPotato@lemmy.world 1 points 2 minutes ago

Except for when that open carrying leftist Vet got shot by the Uber driving other Vet when he decided that a low carry was a threatening posture and got off.

[–] MML@sh.itjust.works 1 points 8 minutes ago

Will you buy me a G36?

[–] thermal_shock@lemmy.world 1 points 28 minutes ago

I agree. Dems tend to pussyfoot hoping the shitbags do what's right. We're past that, they need consequences and penalties for being hateful, violent asshats.

[–] DarkFuture@lemmy.world 2 points 2 hours ago

Spoiler Alert: It's because American conservatives are racist and black people are open carrying.

[–] Avicenna@programming.dev 9 points 12 hours ago (1 children)

plot twist, all the people in that photo are now ICE agents (except the black guy, he is deported).

[–] SoleInvictus@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 points 9 hours ago* (last edited 9 hours ago)

It's funny because it's true, so that instantly shifted gears to sad.

2026: so far as bad as 2025, plus one.

[–] DylanMc6@lemmy.dbzer0.com 8 points 14 hours ago

We need more community defense classes now more than ever. Seriously!

[–] ChunkMcHorkle@lemmy.world 15 points 18 hours ago (2 children)

Anyone else remember the wild accusations all these years about how tHe LiBrUlS wAnNa TaKe Ur gUnS!

But wait. Anyone noticing how it's not the "libruls" shitting themselves right now, but the NRA and right-wing 2A groups who want no part of this new narrative?

For anyone paying attention, this was always the right wing plan. Always.

[–] frog_brawler@lemmy.world 2 points 8 hours ago

Gun rights were previously restricted during the Reagan administration too. These people are seriously the scum of the earth. They’re just too stupid to be convinced of that, and if it finally got through, it wouldn’t change anything.

[–] SoleInvictus@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 9 hours ago

Absolutely. I have an overarching theorem about US "Conservative" politicians and donors that I've been challenging for decades but remains unchanged.

Tr;dr: the top brass are all fucking grifters.

Their primary strategy is doing whatever is most effective and expedient for increasing their socioeconomic power, even if that directly contradicts their previous and current actions and alleged principles. They're only ostensibly aligned with conservative values because they're the best for meeting that goal, especially because true social conservative voters are overall both less educated and intelligent, and therefore less critical.

Since noticing that, their actions are all quite consistent and predictable and the hypocrisy rarely surprises me.

[–] ImgurRefugee114@reddthat.com 129 points 1 day ago

The victim's gun was in a waistband holster and an ICE agent took it before the other one shot him. The blatant lying is wild

[–] Switorik@lemmy.zip 46 points 23 hours ago (9 children)

This is one of the main reasons people don't vote blue. They care a lot about their firearms. If the red start going after them, grab some popcorn because things will go down. Maybe this is whats needed to get them to open their eyes.

[–] dreamkeeper@literature.cafe 6 points 10 hours ago* (last edited 10 hours ago) (2 children)

Nah. There isnt some huge group of people who would give their vote to Dems if Dems were pro-gun. The Dems would lose more support than they would gain. The Dems' gun control positions are mostly pretty moderate and have majority support in swing states.

I see this pro-gun hysteria on the Virginia sub on Reddit all the time. They're so massively out of touch with real life. They actually think that hardcore pro-gun positions are popular when they're not, polls consistently show that large majorities of the electorate support gun control measures.

They were all screaming about how Dems were losing votes because of gun control, and then Spanberger proceeded to win by 15 points and the legislature now has the largest Dem majority since the 1970s.

[–] AquaTofana@lemmy.world 2 points 6 hours ago

I think its dependent on their base. I firmly believe Beto O'Rourke would have unseated Fled Cruz if there wasn't an emotional sound bite of him saying "Hell yeah we're taking your guns!" After a WalMart in his hometown was shot up.

Ted Cruz (and Greg Abbott in the ensuing gubnatorial election) both played the FUCK out of that clip, and Beto lost both elections but only by a slim margin.

I'm not a 2A person, but I personally think if there was someone progressive like AOC or Bernie Sanders AND they touted gun ownership, they would be a winning candidate every single time.

[–] PhoenixDog@lemmy.world 2 points 9 hours ago

Way too many people are "Anything but the D". And then complain they're incels.

[–] FatVegan@leminal.space 8 points 15 hours ago (1 children)

You know a country is deeply fucked when their guns are more important than literally everything else.

[–] PhoenixDog@lemmy.world 1 points 9 hours ago

Healthcare? Nah.

Education? Nah.

Human rights? Nah.

Pew Pew Machines I can shoot cans with? Only thing that matters!

[–] AlecSadler@lemmy.dbzer0.com 10 points 16 hours ago (1 children)

Disagree. They're fine with it if the person doing it claims to be red.

Guarantee no die hard 2FA MAGAt changes their mind over any of this.

Trump voters have literally lost their business, their jobs, have had to relocate due to lifestyle collapse, and they still say voting for him is better than the alternative.

[–] fluffykittycat@slrpnk.net 2 points 13 hours ago

single issue gun voters are lost to trump now

[–] adespoton@lemmy.ca 50 points 22 hours ago (1 children)

“The dems want to take away your firearms!”

“That may or may not be true, but the GOP WILL just kill you and label you a terrorist if they find out you have a firearm.”

[–] kryptonianCodeMonkey@lemmy.world 18 points 21 hours ago (1 children)

That's been true for a long time in police interactions. Possessing a firearm in public alone has been justification for detainment, arrest and use of force including lethal force countless times.

[–] adespoton@lemmy.ca 12 points 21 hours ago

Yes, but now it’s true for white male conservatives who just happen to be in the right place at the wrong time.

Not an equality they’re used to.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] My_IFAKs___gone@lemmy.world 94 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Good ol' No-Evidence Noem. "Just take my word for it, Cricket practically asked me to shoot him in the face with that shotgun. He was a Domestic ~~Terrier~~ Terrorist. Anyone who pisses me off is a Domestic Terrorist."

[–] Resonosity@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 10 hours ago

Clearly the dog had a gun with an intent to kill

[–] hopesdead@startrek.website 34 points 1 day ago (36 children)

I have always held the moral belief that no citizen should be allowed to legally own a firearm. That doesn’t mean we should just ignore current law.

load more comments (36 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›