- cross-posted to:
- armedqweers@lemmy.blahaj.zone
- cross-posted to:
- armedqweers@lemmy.blahaj.zone
You must log in or register to comment.
It’s a good sentiment, but also…
Please don’t trivialize how police respond to an armed black man.
Yeah, in a modern police state, owning a firearm isn’t gonna help once you’re in their sights. If you think it will, that just means you’re being brought in cold rather than doing time.
I’m all for self protection, though, and ensuring that it isn’t only the right who’s armed.
I agree, but counterpoint. If you’re carrying a gun for political protection/self-defense, you also need to be trained and organized on gun safety, community protocols with guns, and collective action.
Argument being that if you do those things, it can just make them come at you even harder rather than the alternative.
If you’re worried about a group of people coming up to murder you. I’m probably less worried about the police response to the fact that I own a weapon.
“Lie down and just get killed, because if you don’t you might get killed”
Once you back people into the corner. You won’t be going to jail.
Alright.
I think in the context of the thread it was pretty clear I was saying that you’re unlikely to intimidate the police into backing down or to outgun them, not that you should just roll over in the face of any threat.
Be realistic about who that weapon is protecting you from, and who it’s just making fill out more paperwork and earn overtime.
That’s fair. Part of organizing community defense is making it absolutely clear that those who are known to be carrying become much more of a target by all fascists.
This is why it is important to form a community. As individuals we are weak.
Thats very true. And the start of stricter gun laws in California was under Ronald Regan when he was governor, in response to groups like the black panthers arming themselves
While its true Reagan was governer then and supported it, all he really did was sign a veto proof bipartisan bill from the California Legislature. Lets not forget those others like Don Mulford and John Knox.
Always loved the saying “If you go far enough left you get your guns back”, always gives my friends a chuckle
I mean you could remove the “minorities” from the post and it would be just as accurate.
An armed population is harder to oppress.
Look how dictatorship 101 starts with removing any easy ways for the people to defend themselves.
That’s true, but one of the biggest hallmarks of fascism is framing a minority population (or several) as the villains responsible for all that ails the nation, and often times there’s no one to stand up for them save for themselves, ultimately resulting in that old addage:
First they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out—because I was not a socialist.
Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out—because I was not a trade unionist.
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.
If you’re a minority and no one will protect you, it’s important to consider what means you might have of protecting yourself, and other minorities. If you’re willing to stand up for one another, their safety is yours, and yours is theirs.
You’re definitely not wrong though. I just think it’s perhaps especially important for vulnerable populations
"You bet " ~ Israelis
While that is a very fair point, I do think the guns are probably still making it harder 😅
Made it easier for them to justify the way they’ve gone about their oppression, but the alternative if no one could protect themselves hardly seems like a better outcome
