From GNU/Linux to GUN/Linux
Open-source?
More like open fire!
GNU/GUN
GNU + GUN
From copy left to cop piglet.
From FOSS to FOSG
And here my friends, we can see an exhibit from the United States of America.
There are plenty of pro-gun people outside the US too
I think the topic is not so much “gun folks”, but more the idea that the US 2nd amendment right equates with all freedoms.
The first and second amendments are seen as the cornor stone rights for sure in the US. They enable and protect each other and other rights played out in the constitution.
freedom is where you might get shot walking your dog.
I tend to disagree for following reasons:
- freedom ends where someone elses freedom begins
- no one said freedom was save
- people don’t stop to murder other people without guns
Its a joke, don’t think too hard about it.
Freedom as a concept is to vague and personal to be useful any kind of real discussion; “freedom” means whatever you think it means. This is why politicians love to say it.
I would say that you’re right guns make people feel safe.
However, that the constant threat of violence in society leads to degradation of social norms, especially for children who then get less socialization and become more extreme.
You see this in like more people choosing to homeschool their kids - they then get lower quality education and poorer social skills and are less able to survive in society. In a capitalist world, this is slowly eating away the ability of americans to compete in a global economy and so there is a strong movement to isolate our economy which will only make us less competitive.
I would say that you’re right guns make people feel safe.
I just wanted to say that guns absolutely do not make me feel safe, knowing one is nearby or seeing one makes me incredibly anxious. Holding one even more so. I don’t understand how people can feel safe around them, to me it’s like having a ticking time bomb in the room but the timer was set by a rng.
That’s fine if you feel like that. And YOU should stay away from them and I fully support your desires and rights to do so. But others don’t feel the same.
And YOU should stay away from them
Why is drunk driving illegal when people should just stay away from drunk drivers?
I don’t support your rights to have them, sorry <3
Yeah no if I know there is an unsecured gun around that makes me feel anything except safe. There is only a very narrow set of circumstances in which having a gun around is non threatening and just walking around in public is not one of those.
Let’s take an example scenario: there’s someone who cut in line in front of you at the supermarket, upon confronting them they turn aggressive.
Scenario 1 (widespread gun ownership): you have to deescalate or risk potentially getting shot by a person that is very obviously not acting rational anymore. In turn this promotes less civil conduct as brashness is encouraged.
Scenario 2 (limited gun ownership): you can reasonably argue with the person since the highest threat you are facing is a pocket knife, a risk that can be mitigated by simply keeping your distance or an obstacle in between.
So yeah there is no reason to hand out guns like they are candy. They are a tool designed for war and violence and as such have no place just being carried around in public.
Empty words from someone that does not understand how countries with less guns still work and don’t have CHILDREN KILLING IN THEIR SCHOOLS ALL THE TIME
To be fair there are countries with a shitload of guns where this doesn’t happen. This is mostly US being a shithole.
At compared to the other western countries, the gun rights in the US are a huge difference to almost all others. Switzerland is the one big exception I can think of, partly because of the huge shooting history / culture (which is often still actively celebrated) and because soldiers can take a private weapon to home (which had the original sense that in case of war, they could directly have a gun).
Yeah, I actually suspect it’s not guns, but the US gun culture itself.
I live in austria, we have gun rights and like 33guns/100people (if I remember correctly) and we never had a single school shooting in our history, also the terrorists involved in the shooting in vienna a few years ago illigaly imported their guns from serbia
But there is law governing how you store your firearms and ammunition, so kids can’t access them, right? It’s not true freedom then /s
That’s just not true / comparable. While Austria has more gun rights than in most other Western countries, it’s nothing in comparison to the US. In Austria, the only guns you can freely buy are single shot guns. And for those, you need to wait three days until you get them.
To get a very limited amount of semi-automatic weapons, you need to, similar to other western countries, have a Weapons possession card that’s subject authorization. To get it, you don’t only need a psychological report but also a justification, be 21 and need to fit other requirements. You also need to report every weapon you get so Austria knows where the weapons are.In the US meanwhile, it depends on the state you’re living very much, but in some states, you can get semi-automatic weapons (which are completely banned in Austria) in a shop in just minutes. And that without any background checks, psychological reports, justifications, approval required, without anything like that. In many states even convicted criminals can get guns like that. And it’s often not even age restricted. In the US, guns are sometimes a presents for kids which they can just…own and use (while in Austria everything is obviously 18+).
And the biggest difference is carrying a gun. In Austria, you are not allowed to carry them in public (and getting that licence is almost impossible for normal people). While in the US (in many states), you can just carry any gun around in public whatsoever. So even if the police sees you having weapons in public, they can’t / don’t do anything about that, because it’s just legal.
I general, the gun rights in Austria are bigger than in most of other Western Europe. But even Obama’s 2012 proposal to significantly lower the freedom of guns in the US would have resulted in still much bigger gun rights than in Austria. There is just a huge difference.
Also there are around 1.332.000 guns in Austria, with around 9.2 million people, that’s around 14 guns per 100 people.
You do have some errors in your little rant. While firearms are easier to acquire in the US as a rule, there are still some restrictions and forms you need to fill out. Plus there can be a near byzantine set of laws that each state and even cites can pass to further restrictions on purchase and ownership. It might be the biggest issue about firearms ownership that there are few national laws for enforcement. It’s mostly up to each state and city regulations and enforcement.
Convicted felons are pretty much barred from firearms ownership across the US. The only real exceptions might be a billionaire who can buy anything. Or perhaps it’s just easier to pay some else to shoot people for them.
Everyone has to fill out a Form 4473 which is a universal federal background check against a data base to see if you can legally own a firearm. It is an electronic background check done at the time of sale and transfer. It can take a few minutes or a few hours to get done. And you can be disqualified for a simple misspelling or even if your name is similar to a some who is barred from purchase. Then it’s up to you to get your name cleared. All and any firearms purchases through a dealer MUST have a Form 4472 attached. And the dealer must keep a record after the sale for a fairly long period of time. A good number of states have further restrictions and requirements on the purchase and ownership of firearms. Which require further state background checks and issuance of a special card to buy a firearm. And individual cities can impose further restrictions yet.
Minors, under 18 years of age, (a few are 21), in the majority of states cannot legally buy a firearm. And are generally only allowed to handle or use a firearm with an adult present - some exceptions would be during a hunting season and only when hunting. But even then, there will be an adult somewhere around.
Carrying a handgun publicly, with the exception of a very small number of states, is very controlled. Some states, like California or New York are quite restrictive to the point that pretty much only wealthy people can actually afford to pay for all the hoops you might need to jump through to get such a permit. A tiny number of states, like Texas allow for common carry laws without a permit, (often called Constitutional Carry). But the majority of states require that you have taken a special class and then go through more special background checks by local law enforcement to get the permit issued. And these permits require renewals every few years with more background checks every time.
Again, I think the biggest issue is the lack of a uniform national set of laws and requirements for firearms purchase and ownership is what confuses everyone. States are considered to have most of the power to make many laws that the federal government can’t over ride. Sometimes this is a good thing and sometimes not so good perhaps. But it’s the system we have for better or worse.
you can buy this here in austria without a Waffenpass or Waffenbesitzkarte, you literally just need to be 18
EDIT: yeah, I thought I had the wrong numbers in mind
EDIT1: also, the Waffenpass (the thing you need to carry them in public isn’t hard to get https://www.oesterreich.gv.at/themen/gesetze_und_recht/waffenrecht/2/Seite.2450900.html#Voraussetzungen)
In the US meanwhile […] [a]nd that without any background checks, psychological reports, justifications, approval required, without anything like that. In many states even convicted criminals can get guns like that.
If you’re talking about buying a firearm from a store, that’s simply not factually correct.
Every single firearm sold by an FFL holder must have a form 4473 filled out, and each person buying a firearm must go through a criminal background check. ANY felony conviction that could have sent you to jail for more than a year–regardless of whether or not you got jail time–permanently bans you from owning a firearm until the conviction is expunged (and in many states, your gun rights need to be proactively reinstated). Any misdemeanor domestic violence conviction will likewise bar you from legally owning a firearm, as will having an active retraining order. Being involuntarily committed to a mental facility will bar you from ever owning a firearm at a federal level (without a judicial proceeding to restore your rights), and being voluntarily admitted will cost you your rights in some states.
Keep in mind that these are federal regulations that supersede any state or local regulations. A state can not opt out of the NICS or decide that gun stores don’t need to comply with BATF regulations. The only “exception” per se is that, in my state, a carry permit means that the gun store doesn’t have to send in form 4473 for approval; you’ve already passed a more stringent background check–including fingerprinting–so it would be moot. You do still need to fill out a form 4473, and the gun store is still required to retain a copy, but the instant background check is deemed irrelevant.
I’m not arguing one way or another but I want to clear up some very common misconceptions about US gun laws.
in some states, you can get semi-automatic weapons (which are completely banned in Austria) in a shop in just minutes. And that without any background checks, psychological reports, justifications, approval required, without anything like that
This is just blatantly untrue and I wish people would stop parroting it. If you go to any shop you need to pass a federal background check to buy any non-vintage firearm (pre-1899…not exactly a ton of those floating around). The exception here is private firearm sales, i.e. I go to Craigslist and sell a rifle or handgun. The law states the seller has to have no reasonable cause to believe they would be an unlawful possessor (weak, yes). With that said, almost half of the states (22 per Wikipedia) have implemented state-level laws requiring a background check for private sales.
In many states even convicted criminals can get guns like that.
Again, objectively untrue. You are not buying a firearm from any legal, licensed dealer in the US without going through a background check. And a violent criminal offense will get you barred from purchasing. For the 28 states without laws around private sales, the seller can be federally legally liable if they sell to someone that is not legally allowed to have a gun and they use it to commit crimes.
In the US, guns are sometimes a presents for kids which they can just…own and use (while in Austria everything is obviously 18+).
No, a child cannot legally own a firearm. The parent can purchase and own a firearm that they are allowed to use, but they do not own it. In many states if the child hurts themselves or others with such a firearm the parents will be held liable, many states have laws around safely storing firearms when children are around.
While in the US (in many states), you can just carry any gun around in public whatsoever. So even if the police sees you having weapons in public, they can’t / don’t do anything about that
In most states if you don’t have a license to conceal carry and you do you are breaking the law and can be charged. I’ll say this one isn’t entirely false but heavily depends on your state.
A large part of why this issue gets nowhere is that neither side can even agree on what is true today, rather than what should be true to bring down the issue of violent crime. If one side says “They’re totally unregulated you can just buy one off Amazon and start blasting. We have to do something!” The other side is gonna think “Well they obviously have no idea what they’re talking about, no point in listening to what they have to say”
Gangs illegally acquiring their guns is how it works everywhere, even in the USA.
Sweden and Canada have pretty high rates of gun ownership and don’t have this problem. That said American school shootings are not as common as they are made out to be, there has been a lot of statistical fudging to make it look so much worse than it is.
What all three countries do have are problems with gangs and they’re only getting worse as poverty drives people to crime. America has it worse because it has more poverty, but we will all catch up soon enough.
My guy, any amount of school shooting is more common than they should be.
Idk how you make shooting students / children out to be much worse than it is. Kinda seems like any stat greater than 0 should be unacceptable and cause for massive societal reevaluation.
Im just gonna point out we as a culture have been dealing with this problem of just random acts of violence for quite awhile, its just that what came before mass shootings is kinda glossed over / forgotten. Before the mass shootings we had bombing campaigns, the una bomber being the most notable. Its just that unless it was really big it rarely got all that much attention and due to how everything was disconnected at the time unless you were the FBI you may not have even noticed it was a thing.
The problem is that the Columbine mass shotting and rise of cameras kinda killed off the mass bombers. Also Columbine happened right when this shift was happening and thusly became the standard for what people do. If it was instead some dudes shooting up a police station I suspect that would have become the norm.
Canada has ~1/4 the firearms per capita compared to the US. My guess is that doesn’t matter, as you go over 1 gun/resident the added guns probably don’t have much of an impact.
However, most shootings in the US are with handguns (restricted in Canada), and a bunch of high-profile shootings with ARs (prohibited in Canada). Concealed carry is practically never allowed, and open carry isn’t either. Safe storage is required, so you can’t carry unsecured guns in your car either. Storing loaded firearms is forbidden. Owning firearms for self defense is forbidden by law (using them as such may or may not be, depending on the circumstances).
TL;DR: it’s not just how many guns, but also what you’re allowed to do with them.
This is the real answer.
When you look at serious violent crime, defining that as robbery, battery, forcible rape, and murder, the rate of serious violent crime is similar in the US and UK (edit - and Australia!). The UK has largely removed firearms from the equation–which is easier, since they’re an island, and didn’t start with 600M firearms–and it has decreased the murder rate, but their overall violent crime rate is still quite high. Despite nominally having single payer health, the system has been intentionally broken by conservatives, and poverty is pretty significant. You see the same kind of sharp economic divides in the UK that you see in the US.
The predictable result is violence.
Murder isn’t the problem, it’s a symptom. It’s like saying that the awful cough and shortness of breath is your problem, and then thinking that cough syrup (with codeine!, since that’s the good shit that works!) is going to fix the underlying pneumonia.
School shootings aren’t a gang problem, and school shootings are way more common in the US than any other developed country.
As a rule of thumb people stop to mass murder other people, without guns. With extremely rare exceptions, we don’t have that shit outside of the US and our schools are not shooting ranges.
The other two things you wrote are not reasons, they are a) a slogan that you could put on a 12 years old t shirt and b) something someone who is having a heart attack might say
Mass murder is extremely rare in general
Outside the US sure, that was my point.
In the States there’s a mass shooting every Tuesday.
I think it’s a bit more often than once a week.
that’s a libertarian ideal. the problem is people don’t think their freedom ends where someone else’s begins.
people don’t stop to murder other people without guns
I live in a red state with lax gun laws. This is probably the stupidest thing I’ve heard anyone say on the Internet. You should sit down and have a talk with Ahmaud Arbery.
It’s it a typo and you’re saying “people don’t stop murdering others without guns”?
Tho I support gun ownership, this guy has no business owning a gun
“If you are a [in my perception] a communist, you don’t wanna step on my lawn” === “If I don’t agree with you, I’ll shoot you”
Plus anyone saying “communist states” is definetly fallen victim of right wing propaganda and haven’t even take the time to research what communisim is. Even the US left political wing is quite capitalisitic.
Just a bunch of bad “arguments” bagged up with slapsticks words which he doesn’t even know the meaning of.
I watched this guy for a little bit and liked his Linux stuff and then in one video he started ranting about how those FOSS licenses that include a requirement to use software ethically are the worst thing in the universe because they bring politics into software and I thought “wait, this guy is ignorant asshole isn’t he?” and turns out yes, yes he is.
Not making the point to defend those licenses or not but all this guy cared about was FOSS not being political and it’s like…are you a child? Do you not understand how all of this is political?
People like this guy give FOSS a really ugly outward facing identity and it turns away soooo many potential contributors and chill people.
To your point about this guy being exactly the kind of person that shouldn’t be allowed to own a precision semiautomatic rifle with 30 round magazines of high caliber rifle rounds, I agree, I have seen that guy get so fucking angry about shit on his channel, he has no ability to control his anger and that kind of person shouldn’t be allowed to own an object that gives their temper tantrums the capacity to kill so many people so quickly before their rational control kicks back in.
“I don’t wanna get political in this video”
Get’s mega political and starts using political lingo used by the right wing
Way to go, dude, you played yourself.
I’ve also seen his temper in his videos plus adding what he said in this video, I am convinced the guy should not be allowed to own a damm BBGun. But he’s lucky he doesnt live in a “communist state”. Yo what a shitshow.
I’ve also seen his temper in his videos plus adding what he said in this video, I am convinced the guy should not be allowed to own a damm BBGun. But he’s lucky he doesnt live in a “communist state”. Yo what a shitshow.
You can see with these conservative white men when they clearly perceive a threatening universe everywhere they look based on their ideology. It is what directly leads to their irrational bouts of anger and violence, and causes things like…
"A 14-year-old African-American boy stopped to ask for directions to school in a Detroit suburb but was shot at instead, according to prosecutors…I got to the house and I knocked on the lady’s door. Then she started yelling at me and she was like, ‘Why are you trying to break into my house?’ " Walker told local station WJBK. “And I was trying to explain to her that I was trying to get directions to Rochester High. And she kept yelling at me. The guy came downstairs, and then he grabbed the gun, and I saw it and started to run. And that’s when I heard the gunshot,” he told the station.
the same old story over and over again
Rightwing white men afraid of the world and thus ready to project anger and violence at the slightest confirmation of whatever dumb bullshit they believe in isn’t a cute look for any community, which is probably why these people tend to feel so isolated in the first place…
Exactly. In a way there IS a “threat” for them, that they will not be anymore at the top of the pyramid, they see it as the “woke, communist, liberals” or whatever trying to subdue them, ironically what they want is to be able to further subdue everyone else.
Also ironic and sad: poor (poor as in not rich) white men were never at the top, they were just as exploited as the rest, the are just made belive they weren’t. Of course they enjoy some extra perks, mostly judicial, but they have more in common with a poor black guy than with a millioner and nothing with a billioner
What a world we have. But at the very least is never dull.
“But what about my illegally obtained riches and privileges? My family enslaved people for hundreds of years, I’m nobility, and you’re just going to come to my home and take what is not yours? What about MY rights? Don’t rock the boat, keep everything the way it’s always been, meaning that I can enjoy royal privileges at the expense of other people’s suffering, famine, violence, and death. Or are you a filthy COMMUNIST?!”
It’s funny. I work with a bunch of righteimg guys a an energy cooperative which is pretty much light communism as it is collectively owned by the consumers without the ability for capital accumulation.
Yeah, I’ve found some right wingers that are like that; on everyday practical terms they like all that sharing and stuff, but somehow don’t connect it to the high-minded political ideals they like to talk about, Like two different topics to them.
They like sharing with the right kind of people.
That was lovely, thank you!
Some portions of the far right are allergic to being called “political”. Even outright Nazis often claim to be moderate. Part of the reason they end up having those beliefs is from a profound lack of awareness of self and others. They thus can convince themselves that they are the moderates, and everyone else is extreme
Of course, is easier to maintain your belives if you see yourself as “moderate” or “apolitical”. Is easier if you belive your line of toughts are share by a “silent majority” thus making it reasonable and moderate.
Just mental hops to affirm themselves.
Sounds a bit like insecurity to me, they don’t see or feel themselves as in the position or capacity to justify what they belive in, so they refuge behind “Is just common sense” or “we are the majority”, “is not political”, basically a post modern rehash of the naturalistic argument.
Propaganda works as a motherfucker, it did 80 years ago, it did 800 years ago, it did 8000 years ago and it is fucking AI weaponized today.
You want communism? Leave FOX on in your home at all times, you may not turn it off, you can lower the volume somewhat but it’s still on as you sleep, and if you disable it the dark men come and enable it again while you’re at work, and leave you with a little reminder and write your name in a little black leather bound notebook and tell your neighbors to report any suspicious behavior or they might be next up for a visit.
To someone who has experience, the GOP is Stalinism in disguise. They don’t hate communists, they hate that they don’t get to be the oppressors. They are 100% the same shit.
I had an interaction a few weeks ago where I made the same obvious statement – that everything is political, like the price of milk is political – and the someone said I was making it political, like gun rights.
That conversation stopped there unfortunately, but it made me realize something.
Politicized is different from political for a lot of people.
Maybe most people realize the price of gas is political, but they don’t think that their internet bill, or whatever, is political. It’s just market forces to them, or whatever they assume about capitalism being good.
Ultimately, I think my point is that when people say things like foss shouldn’t be political, I think they’re saying they agree, but they would lose their in-group status be agreeing with something “woke” like ethics in software. So they have to make a proxy argument about what is and isn’t political.
You know what solves this?
Education.
You know what this nation does not have?
Education*.
(* terms and conditions apply)
Agreed.
Funny that I think you tapped into another politicized proxy argument here. People want their kids to get a good education, but they didn’t want it to be woke.
Things were better when it was puritanical teaching and sex – and anything about sex – was bad and parents didn’t have to think about their little horny teenagers touching each other. Gross, right?
Hence, book bans instead of education funding.
This is like that time I discovered a dude who reviewed camping equipment and watched like ten of his videos and then all of a sudden it went from “top ten hatchets for the back country” to “Zionist lizard Jews are stealing our testosterone to make us compliant.”
It took me months to convince YouTube to stop showing me anti woke content.
Once YouTube decides you might be a good candidate for rightwing radicalization or conspiracy theories, good luck getting the algorithm to show you anything else lol. I am honestly surprised you even got the algorithm off that in 5 months. YouTube has permanently decided I am a good target to manipulate into conspiracies and rightwing content based on the fact that it has figured out I am a white man and I watch YouTube. Does it matter the only youtube political content I watch is leftist YouTube channels like the Majority Report? It does not.
I watched one guy’s channel where he travelled and filmed megalithic structures around the world, until out of the blue one day he just started ranting about wokeness and gays and soy liberals or whatever the fuck.
I am so fucking done with literally both sides of that red herring being dangled in front of hyenas to keep them killing each other over the scraps instead of biting the hand that enslaves them.
There is zero correlation between technical acuity and moral maturity.
Being good at doing something does not make you a moral person. It’s easy to get it wrong because society actually, consciously and ubiquitly promotes and reinforces the equivalence.
Meanwhile FOSS directly attacks multiple capitalist statements about communism
Open software is considered by many a modern example of a anachists-communist project.
The dude is just spewing what he belives to be truth without any regard for the concepts he is actually talking about. Even me supporting both FOSS and gun ownership I belive the whole video should be regard as misinformation/misrepresentation at the very least, propaganda in reality.
Open software is considered by many a modern example of a anachists-communist project.
Do you know of any good sources?
Not exactly good, my comment mostly stems from coversations both online and irl, that’s way I wrote " considered by many" and not just “considered”. There is a entry in wikipedia about it tho:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchist_communism#Gift_economies_and_commons-based_organizing
I’d say it’s more like syndicalism more than anything.
Just today I was reading some really concerning articles from Raymond along these lines.
http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=8708 http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=8752
"I had business outside today. I needed to go in towards Philly, closer to the riots, to get a new PSU put into the Great Beast. I went armed; I’ve been carrying at all times awake since Philadelphia started to burn and there were occasional reports of looters heading into the suburbs in other cities.
I knew I might be heading into civil unrest today. It didn’t happen. But it still could.
Therefore I’m announcing my rules of engagement should any of the riots connected with the atrocious murder of George Floyd reach the vicinity of my person.
I will shoot any person engaging in arson or other life-threatening behavior, issuing a warning to cease first if safety permits. Blacks and other minorities are otherwise safe from my gun; they have a legitimate grievance in the matter of this murder, and what they’re doing to their own neighborhoods and lives will be punishment enough for the utter folly of their means of expression once the dust settles. White rioters, on the other hand, will be presumed to be Antifa Communists attempting to manipulate this tragedy for Communist political ends; them I consider “enemies-general of all mankind, to be dealt with as wolves are” and will shoot immediately, without mercy or warning. UPDATE: I didn’t mention white nationalists because I judge my chances of encountering any member of that tiny, ineffectual movement to be effectively zero, and I refuse to cooperate with the mass-media fiction that they are a significant factor in this crisis.
We don’t have a problem with white nationalists attempting to burn down our country using black people as tools and proxies. We have a problem with Communists doing that. I insist on naming – and if necessary, shooting – the real enemy."
-ESR
Scratch a right-libertarian…
Man, that is some concerning shit, pardon my french. Really concerning shit.
Im just speachless tbh. I talk a lot, you can see it in this threat, but I can only say about that, that it is some very concerning shit.
Does he fancy himself to be Batman or what?
I think he fancied himself as what Rittenhouse fancied himself. If you check the dates, the “Rules for Rioters” post predates the Rittenhouse one.
But yeah, it was concerning enough to even leave an Argentino friend of mine, who voted for Milei no less, speechless.
He’s just waiting for the Reichstag to burn down, so he can blame the communists and enact some Enabling Act of
19332025
The good ole anti-antifa.
I mean he basically admits that his beliefs structure is just following the herd and that he hasn’t put any effort into understanding philosophical first principles. I wouldn’t think about it too hard.
I think everyone should be able to own nerve gas.
Not THIS guy, of course, but everyone else.
Hmmm… I never said that. You’re misreprensenting my words.
Maybe what I meant is that there should be clear and hard rules for gun ownership? Maybe I did mean that only him should not be able to own one, perhaps I even meant that only people I agree with shoud own guns. Is not possible to for you to know what I generally believe about ownership and regulation only from my comment above. So please do not put words in my mouth.
Also, bold statement comming from someone with a clear wink to Anarchy in their handle.
“That isn’t happening”
While that position held, Marx now acknowledged that the standard of living of the wage earners advances with every progressive stride the bourgeoisie take. The matter, then, was more relative than absolute. Marx had now fully grown up.
Imo, a problem with Marx, is that tha the languaje he used lend itself to very broad interpretations, thus making it easy to absorb him into whatever ideology/plan/scheme.
People who like Stalin or Mao and in a lesser degree Trotsky and Lennin -which to whom we nowadays call commnunists- used his languaje to reaffirm their ideas. Even tho imo their ideoligical brand was quite a ways out of Marx.
Yeah, it’s annoying to talk to some self described communists. There was one guy who said consumer cooperatives were capitalist despite the fact that they are communally owned, don’t allow for capital accumulation, and are literally a form of organization Marx endorsed, but the guy I was arguing told me I needed to do more reading. Consumer cooperatives are a little more on the Anarchist side close to worker cooperatives, but they are most definitely socialist.
I saw a guy here in Lemmy arguing once that the nordics are socialists contries… The dude also told the comenters trying to explain why is not true to go read… I get they were confused and I belive is a easy mistake to make, but he had so many good comments explaining in a calm and easy way why he wasn’t right and he keept just deying it.
There is just sadly too much (miss)information out there and most people dont have the interest, energy or (and in a lesser degree) the capacity to exercise critical thinking and reading.
He’s a product of the structuralism which dominated the industrial era philosophy. It’s incredibly obvious if you study political science even a little bit, and it’s the easiest angle of criticism towards any orthodox theory of the era. Stalin and Mao are very much in that same modernist camp. That’s why I just roll my eyes at internet communists who consider themselves well read because they have Marxist.org bookmarked. These are people who think the biggest problem with Jacobin is not enough fan service.
All this stuff is just laughably outdated. The most annoying part is that it has been updated to reflect more modern philosophy, but they never want to hear it. They see contemporary leftist thought as Marxist revisionism and just compromising with liberals, which is the worst sin imaginable.
People forget that Marx advocated for ruthless criticisim. As a rule whenever I read something and it peeks my interest, before I keep digging further I ask myself: Where’s the catch here? Are they trying to sell me something? Who can actually benefit from this.
This simple scruttiny maybe won’t reveal the holes in the idea, but it will lead you to things you can research, read contra-arguments and get a fuller and rounder idea of whatever you are reading. But sadly this is a skill that is getting loss, not because people can’t intellectually do it, they just do not care or want to put the effort.
US-americans got the crazy
I want to share software and ideas, not bullets and death. Hard pass.
i would argue that you probably lean more on the side of sharing user rights and freedoms generically. Rather than the more specific “software and ideas”
You can certainly have different opinions relating to guns. But they do have a fundamental overlap of underlying concepts. Rights are rights at the end of the day. Either you have them. And they’re justified, or you don’t, and none of them are.
Rights are what a community agrees on that they should have. I’m happy my community has agreed that owning guns is a priviledge, not a right. There is no sufficient reason owning guns should be a right, so I can be completely in favour of rights and freedoms without including any right to own guns.
i mean, technically if we’re arguing that it’s a privilege more than a right. That wouldn’t really change the point being made here, considering that legally, the government does have the ability to prevent you from owning a gun. Minor semantic shenanigan though so meh.
Please just stop
i think this is probably the best reply i’ve gotten so far.
Well, that’s hard to do when your government are the only ones with guns and power.
Can confirm, no FOSS at all in Europe
Innocent lives lost due to “law abiding citizens” mishandling guns: a metric shit ton
Corrupt governments toppled by gun lovers: 0
The thought of how many people might be stocking ammo and thinking to use out if their favorite politician loses makes me happy for having an ocean between me and them.
You don’t understand. They mean they want to topple democratic societies in favor of theocratic fascism.
Peace is the enemy.
These fuckers never stopped waging the civil war, that’s what this is about and was ever all about.
Corrupt governments toppled by gun lovers: 0
i mean, in a sense. That is why the US exists today. The british are well known gun fanatics.
Corrupt governments toppled by gun lovers: 0
LOL someone needs a history lesson.
It’s no surprise that virtually every deeply corrupt and genocidal government starts with banning and confiscating weapons.
Ahh, the typical Reddit old tradition of vague statement of knowledge with no meat to not be rebutted. Had hoped that didn’t reach Lemmy.
Lightning round. Russia? Ha! China? Ha! North Korea? Japan? Ha! Netherlands? Hahahaha
USA…? Hahahahahahhahahhaha
The US might prove true if you include gun nuts toppling their own government by voting for fascist scum.
Do you like the two party system? Do you like the electoral college? Do you like the lack of accountability your politicians face? I’m assuming you must assuming you’re a gun owner who hasn’t tried to liberate the US
What about the innocent lives lost because they didn’t have a gun? You think everyone can fight with their bare hands or a knife?
Who do you even need to fight bro? If I was say getting mugged I would give them all my valuables save a 10 % tip that I could give them when I was allowed to run the hell away from there. Do not be a stupid macho idiot. Be a smart coward without neither a wallet, gun nor a fatal wound.
Jokes aside, the main uptick is the smaller chance of someone less mentally stable than you with less to lose also having a gun.
So what about when you are getting raped? What about when someone doesn’t want to let you go? Do you know what its like to almost be murdered?
If you want to say “Why do you even need to fight bro” you’re basically just saying good luck to all the people who can’t defend themselves and just letting them die. And do you not understand how regimes come to light? Just take a look at Russia, Putin just got to serve for another 6 years. Do you wonder how somebody stays in power for 24 years and more? Because nobody can fight back.
How are you supposed to go an get your gun from the locked cabinet where I assume you keep it to prevent a psycho from stealing it and using it against you? Unless you keep it attached to you at all times risking a misfire or your attacker grabbing it and using it against you. What if you accidentally kill someone who was infact innocent when you think you’re doing the right thing but you misjudged a situation? How do I know that you can be trusted with a firearm? What distinguishes you from a school shooter just by looking at you? If the US is so free why don’t you fight back against the corrupt two-party system?
Russia has pretty high gun ownership… comparable to Europe/Australia and not far from Canada. The US has like 4x the guns per capita as the next highest countries, and it’s far from the most free.
Owning a gun makes you more likely to die by gun accident or by that gun being used against you. You logic is completely wrong.
You think these people care about logic? Wait until you hear who they are voting for and their reasoning for it.
If a country like the US had a lower violent dead per capita than other first world countries like France or Germany, I would agree with you. But given that the numbers are 3 to 6 times those of EU countries, it doesn’t seem to be working.
Still, if you want to quantify how many lives were saved in any given year I can give you how many innocent ones were lost. Hard to measure, you say? Then it’s a weak arguments based on feelings not facts.
If a country like the US had a lower violent dead per capita than other first world countries like France or Germany, I would agree with you.
It doesn’t have as high of a gun ownership rate as the US (no one does), but Czechia has some of the laxest gun laws in Europe, including allowing the concealed carry of a handgun like the US (at least 1 million Czechs have permits to own a firearm, a large portion of which conceal carry them for self defense) and they have a lower homicide rate than Germany or France (Source: World Bank)
Even as a supporter of gun rights, I don’t think that definitively proves that guns, on a societal level, prevent deaths. I don’t believe that in general. I do believe, however, that on a personal level, a well trained individual who sees the need to defend themself or people they love can prevent harm by owning a firearm. I do also believe that in a society (America) with a broken policing system, and an increasingly authoritarian Republican party that wants to crack down on my rights and the rights of people I love, I’d like the option to protect myself and my friends/family.
The more knives people use, the more people get cut.
More guns = more gun violence.
How fucking hard is that to comprehend?
“We have dug this hole for ourselves so deep we can’t get out of it. At this point our chances are better if we keep digging straight down, it has to bottom out somewhere, right?”
/ The words of a truly dying society
Im pretty sure Japan is sharing software and ideas all the time
I struggle to see Japan as a bastion of freedom lol. Fun place to visit for sure, but between the archaic drug laws and suicide forests I’m not sure they are a society others should be modeling themselves after.
Not sure if the countries with more gun rights are either more free or have a society with modeling after.
Compared to Japan, I mean yeah. Living in Japan & South Korea is absolutely hell, they’re probably some of the most conservative governments/societies in the world, certainly the most conservative in the first world.
this is moving goalposts, they specified sharing software and ideas. But check out this list of suicide rates if you think our gun culture is beneficial at all https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_suicide_rate
It’s better when it’s the government with guns against criminals, randos, and children with guns.
More guns is always the solution. If it only causes more violence and bloodshed like a tribal civil war in the jungle then you clearly did not get enough guns.
Plus, they’re FUN! People forget that it’s FUN to shoot guns. Isn’t that worth a dysfunctional society crippled by violence and murder?
Since your on board with the government only having guns, then please explain to me how Putin has stayed in power for the last 24 years? What about Nazi Germany?
@lemmylem @Railcar8095 oh i love the fantasy ‘we’re going to overthrow the government with our rifles’ trope, please tell us more
A lot of the 3d printed designs are.
If you wanna get really crazy, last I heard was that people were working on 3d printed 9mm ammo.
So not only are the guns FOSS, but the bullets are too.
im struggling to imagine how a plastic bullet would work
I’m going to assume they don’t include the gunpowder
Gauss guns don’t need gunpowder, only gigantic capacitors.
For those you need to look at DIY channels, not 3D printing. Besides, I wouldn’t be surprised if gun nuts were all “Ewwww, gauss guns? Where’s the explosion? More like GIRLY GUNS, amirite?”
I’m presuming printed cases. Factory made polymer cased ammunition has been proven, so the logical next step is figuring out how to DIY it.
i can see that, but 3d printer plastic necessarily has to have a much lower melting point no?
im sorry if this is dumb, im not a big gun connoisseur, isnt it very easy to manufacture the metal casing anyway? and im also assuming you would need to make the lead thing too.
I’m not looped into any possible home attempts to make DIY casings, but I would presume you’d need to do some problem solving with the material. It just seems like the most plausible angle to work on to me. The point of thermal issues is relevant, not just in the material standing up to heat but also for cooling the gun itself. It’s imagine that successful DIY printed casing would be more feasible with single shot or bolt action type firearms.
With traditional home reloading, no people normally don’t produce their own casings. You can buy them, or you can reuse already fired casings.
It depends on the level of 3d printer you’re talking about. Your average $300 at-home printer is basically the hot end of a glue gun on stepper motors, though you might be surprised at some of the materials they’re capable of printing in. Everything from basic ABS plastics to Nylon and Carbon-Fiber reinforced filaments are easily available.
If you’re talking commercial grade, $10k+ printers, that’s an entirely different story. Commercial printers are capable of printing objects out of steel. There’s been a lot of work in that area to print all kinds of things from guns parts in military grade polymers to entire engine blocks, no assembly required.
On the 3d printed gun end, supposedly people have figured out the issues to the point where you can print 100% of the parts out of super basic plastic (the most commonly used plastic in 3d printing is PLA, which has a melting point around 200 degrees Celsius), though the stuff I’ve seen online is more about using internals from cheap guns and 3d printing the external “furniture” of the gun either for custom cosmetics or aftermarket parts like handles and grips, or to create an expensive gun out of cheaper components. As for the ammo, I’ve only heard that “people were working on it.” I don’t know any of the specifics.
I couldn’t tell you myself, I think it’s crazy too, but NATO trialed caseless ammo during the Cold War, and if that’s possible, I don’t see why plastic ammo (at least cases) couldn’t be.
Though you sure as hell won’t see me jumping in line to try it out.
Caseless is an entirely different branch of innovation than polymer cases, but both have been shown to work.
There are multiple examples, but one that sprang to mind was the Textron NGSW submission, if you want to see what was being floated to the military recently.
https://soldiersystems.net/2020/10/13/textron-systems-next-generation-squad-weapon-update/
No need for a 3D printer to make your own ammo, when there are reloading presses already designed for that that will make reliable and safe ammo much more easily. People also make their own lead bullets from tire weights and fishing weights, just by melting it in a crucible and pouring lead into molds
If I had to guess, the two most likely reasons are: for the challenge of it, and to reduce the amount of required tools.
I feel like the people who work on 3d printed guns largely fall into 2 camps - the people who just like to build things, and the people who look at a 3d printer as a valuable tool in the whole “become ungovernable” concept.
I know the second group are responsible for designing a fully 3d printed gun that’s currently being used to fight against a genocidal military regime in Myanmar, for example. The people there are getting zero international aid, and can’t get their hands on guns. But, they can get ammo, and they can get 3d printers. So they’ve set up 3d printer assembly lines to make guns that are at least good enough to kill a soldier and take his gun. It was designed for exactly that kind of situation - basically the Liberator one-shot pistol the CIA designed to be air-dropped into occupied France during WW2, except as a modern semi-auto SMG chambered in 9mm.
Crazy, I saw a lot in the shotgun realm for 3d printing slugs and shot and sabot shells, but nothing else yet. I’ll have to do some digging. Honestly moving away from lead sounds great to me.
This GNU/GUN is distributed in the hope that it will be useful, but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY. IN NO EVENT UNLESS REQUIRED BY APPLICABLE LAW OR AGREED TO IN WRITING WILL ANY COPYRIGHT HOLDER, OR ANY OTHER PARTY WHO MODIFIES AND/OR CONVEYS THE PROGRAM AS PERMITTED ABOVE, BE LIABLE TO YOU FOR DAMAGES, INCLUDING ANY GENERAL, SPECIAL, INCIDENTAL OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES ARISING OUT OF THE USE OR INABILITY TO USE THE PROGRAM (INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO LOSS OF DATA OR DATA BEING RENDERED INACCURATE OR LOSSES SUSTAINED BY YOU OR THIRD PARTIES OR A FAILURE OF THE PROGRAM TO OPERATE WITH ANY OTHER PROGRAMS), EVEN IF SUCH HOLDER OR OTHER PARTY HAS BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES.
Removed by mod
Yeah you think. They’ve come a long way since Cody Wilson’s proof of concept dubbed “The Liberator.” Check out the 3011 or Hoffman lowers, or the FGC9 “Bob” rest JSTARK’s soul.
Watch in horror as I mag dump my 3d printed AR
Guns don’t kill people, I kill people when I read EULAs
Real
I knew something was off, I never really could watch his channel for some reason. This is one more hint that my intuition wasn’t wrong.
This. Old dude ranting all the time, refusing change, being kinda self entitled and with veeeery MURICA vibes.
Same for me
He always seemed a bit strange to me. Here we are
Thats fine, but I also would argue against this kind of purity testing. Where a person is written off because they disagree with you on one or two issue. There are a lot of colorful characters in the community so you would quickly end up very alone…
I think overall DT is a good advocate for FOSS.
I like this point of view. I struggle with it myself. It’s the reason I didn’t watch this video when he released it. I didn’t want to write him off. He’s made a few comments here or there over the years that has let me glean some info where he just seems like he’d be a tackleberry mall ninja type (works loss prevention/aka mall cop).
But maybe he isn’t, and regardless, I watched his videos for the FOSS content and he really doesnt get political(usually …this video was out of left field). I try to separate the “art from the artist” so to speak.
That said, I wish “artists” didn’t make that so difficult.
For some reason, I feel like he would look better posing with a wooden-body hunting or sniper rifle.
I started watching DistroTube several years ago, seemed like a fairly straightforward guy, would do a few tutorials on Linux commands, aggregated FOSS headlines, did a full install of Arch in real time once.
Then one day on his channel he told a story. Apparently he worked in a retail environment, and was accused by a customer, a “minority” as he put it, of “following her around the store.” He made a pretty big point that he responded to his manager “thanks for letting me know.”
suspicious eye squint
Then he told the story or going to a Trump rally.
Yeah he’s a right-wing nutjob. Surprised he hasn’t hurt anyone yet.
His rant on Mozilla’s “We need to do more than deplatforming” was my last straw. He raked them over the coals for a title and never read a word from the article.
I’m pro FOSS, and pro gun. I just can’t stand people that do no effort and use there platforms to sow division though.
Remember: Always replace EagleOS on your SmartGun with Linux to avoid the NRA’s telemetry.
Thankfully “smart” guns are not ever likely to make it to the market, despite what a large swath of anti-2A people believe.
I can’t even get the fingerprint reader on my phone to work consistently; why would I want to put something like that on a firearm when my life could be at risk if my gun doesn’t work correctly?
What if they work like in MGS4
How do those guns work? I haven’t played the game.
Soldiers have nanomachines (in Metal Gear nanomachines can be replaced with magic) in them that work like ID tags and guns only work when they detect it
So… Magic? I mean, sure, if we had perfect magic that knew who could and could not be trusted to use your gun, fine. In a practical sense, all you need to prevent other people from using your guns is a lock. I put a lock on my closet. If the aren’t under my supervision, they’re behind at least one lock.
RFID implants are a thing in humans
Then they would be hackable for unauthorized use with the right nanomachines, son
Geez no spoilers
Haven’t played that one, so I don’t know which on it is.
Smart guns in Cyberpunk seems interesting, but I don’t think that most anti-gun people would be that happy about Skippy being real.
I really want them, from a tech stand point, to be a thing, but no doubt on the reliability issue.
The better design I’ve see is something like RFID in the hands that reads on the grip of the gun. Biometrics are not a good idea for any system that needs that level of reliableility. The other thing is I would want it to a trigger well replacement not a constant check (I.e. once unlocked it stays unlocked untill deliberately locked again).
People generally won’t accept implants for things like that. Supposedly Biofire has a pretty reliable smart gun coming out any time now: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2cRm9BMxl90
I’ve been following them! It’ll be interesting for sure to see what comes out.
They are popular in the biohacker community with one girl I know with like a dozen sheusees for street magic.
If you can get them added and removed at home its less scary I think.
Even an RFID reader would be a bad thing, IMO. First and foremost, you have the issue of battery life; most people fail to check the batteries in their smoke detectors regularly, so I can’t imagine people would remember to check the reader in their firearm. Secondly, given that many people that have guns have multiple guns, you would need some kind of sending unit–assuming that the firearm would be the reader, since the reader is going to be larger–that is either universal, or can be programmed and paired to multiple devices. Either one of those would still allow unauthorized users to steal your gun. Especially if they had something like a Flipper Zero that could read and modify RFID data.
Adding on to this, you may have to shoot with your off hand, or in a position where the reader isn’t close enough to detect the chip; then you have a no-shoot situation, which could potentially be deadly.
I had to scan my credit card three times at the grocery store yesterday; the reader couldn’t read my card. Now imagine that when someone is trying to carjack you.
I would want smart guns to be at least as reliable as a 1911–which is not a reliable firearm–before I would go for them.
I don’t think I would trust it in a reactive shoot circumstance either to be honest. I’m also not too worried about a pretty advanced cyber threat of someone both actvily attacking an RFID chip (a programable definetly adds added complexity factor to me too) and getting my firearm. Its more so if someone broke into my house and took my firearm they would have added difficulty using it or if someone is in my house, kids, guests, etc and they get ahold of it there is one added layer of safety.
People have definitely tried.
You have This., and This. Like everything, it seems like it’s mostly just a political issue. You’d probably get more gas out of a smart holster, honestly, but there’s just not very much demand from the people who buy guns for actual safety measures, including police departments and militaries. The closest I think you’ll find that gun owners commonly want is access to suppressors, mostly out of the convenience of not having to wear hearing protection, and also maybe that it makes them feel like a cool epic black ops guy.
They simply aren’t reliable in the kind of situations where you’re likely to need a firearm though. As I said in another comment, I would want a smart gun to be at least as reliable as a 1911, and–to be very clear–a 1911 is not what I would call a reliable firearm.
I have constant problems with the fingerprint scanner on my phone. If my hands are too dry, no dice. Even slightly wet, nope. Bad day? Yeah, I’m going to have to enter my passphrase. And what if I need to shoot off-hand? Facial recognition? Cameras have a hard time with black and Asian people already, but now my life might depend on a camera getting it right the first time? And might depend on it in bad lighting?
This isn’t something I would ever seriously consider.
IMO, if you want-or need–to keep a loaded gun near you while you sleep, just leave it unlocked, and then either lock it in a real security container, or keep it on your person when you aren’t in your bedroom.
BTW - I generally avoid anything with Ian McCollum, since he’s been pretty clear that he doesn’t support 2A rights for everyone (e.g., the poors, LGBTQ+ people, non-white people, etc.), and has generally been acting like a right-wing grifter. Which is unfortunate.
Yeah, there’s not really a great solution that’s going to be reliable and also be fast. The best case scenario I can think of for a smart gun is maybe a car gun, or something that people might otherwise have kept in a safe, but gun safes and locks aren’t really expensive enough to justify these kinds of purchases, and obviously they’re going to be more reliable than any digital security you might wanna go for. These sorts of things are also somewhat spoofable, even just with modification to the gun, so I don’t really think smart gun systems would really help cut down on gun trafficking, either. At least, not with any actually feasible, normal solution.
BTW - I generally avoid anything with Ian McCollum, since he’s been pretty clear that he doesn’t support 2A rights for everyone (e.g., the poors, LGBTQ+ people, non-white people, etc.), and has generally been acting like a right-wing grifter. Which is unfortunate.
Yeah I saw the whole uhh, brownells thing that happened between him and inrangeTV, and that kinda sucked, plus the azov battalion book which seemed like pure grift. Also the HEAT rig collab he released sucked. I dunno that I’d call him a right wing grifter too much on that front, as much as just, a pure grifter, which is maybe right wing depending on how you’re judging your personal overton window. I don’t really think whatever his political beliefs are tend to infect his actual content much, if at all. It does kinda suck, though, just generally. Luckily I have adblock so I don’t really have to be supporting his grift while I learn about cool historical stuff, and he’s a pretty good resource with his disassemblies of obscure stuff. Overall, he sucks more than I like.
but gun safes and locks aren’t really expensive enough to justify these kinds of purchases
This is the only thing I disagree with you on. A good gun safe and lock is incredibly expensive. Anything that’s actually burglary rated is going to start at about $5k and go up from there. Good locks, like an S&G mechanical combination lock, can be had for a couple hundred bucks. (And by ‘good’, I mean the ones that the DoD uses for high-security; it would take an autodialer about a day, on average, to open one.) ‘Good enough’ safes are not too bad though, since they’re mostly acting as a deterrent. E.g., little Timmy probably isn’t going to spend a couple hours trying every possible combination until he finds the right one, and he’s probably not going to take a pry bar to it.
Deviant Olam has a few videos up on gun safes, and also has a video of him showing what it takes to break into a DoD-approved safe (…that he was getting paid to break into). IIRC the general rule of thumb is that a gun safe should be 15-25% of the replacement value of your guns. If you only have one or two, whatever meets your state’s requirement–if your state has a mandate about locking guns up–is fine. If you’ve got $10,000 in firearms–which is scarily easy to do–then you probably want to spend about $2000 or so on a residential security container. If you have a single legal machine gun, you’re probably going to want to invest in a safe that’s upwards of $10k.
I sincerely hope that they can find a way to make these work and be as reliable as a Glock. Not necessarily because they can’t be spoofed, trafficked, etc., but because it would significantly cut down on accidents, and it would also make it much less likely that your own gun could be used against you.
To be fair, enough guns can make any project open source.
The definitive solution to GPL non-compliance
Also the solution to proprietary software
Bahaha
Yes, because the free use of software conflates with wanting everyone (including the lunatics) armed with deadly weapons running around the places you try to live.
These Muricans really have such ignorant view on the world. I doubt they have ever left their hometown, let alone visited actual developed nations with real gun laws.
40% of Americans have never left the country.
11% have never left their own state.
I don’t consider myself well-traveled, because I can’t afford to be, but I’ve done my best (starting with vacations with my parents) to see other parts of the world.
Thats equally funny and correct imo.
Keep in mind 10% of America lives in California, where the gun laws are better.
deleted by creator
That’s not true. Gun homicide rate in California is 4.7. Gun homicide rate in Arizona is 5.9.
Are you thinking of the total number? Because California’s huge population is going to skew that.
Also California has much larger cities than Arizona, and population density plays a factor.
deleted by creator
You do know there are left wing people out there who own guns and go to the range, right? Because when them nationalists show up in their leather boots, knocking on doors, they won’t give a damn if you’re a pacificist. They gonna go pop-pop-pop.
Learn from the black panthers. If proliferation of guns is the standard, abstaining will only make you - and your children - a juicier target.
But, even if you’re anti-guns, there’s one more thing.
One talking point you could use with pro-gun people though, even if you’re anti-gun…
“So let me get this straight… you’re against the government taking away your guns, but for the government taking away your encryption?”
Say it with me now:
THE RIGHT TO ENCRYPT SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED
US is a great example that guns dont stop guns. they just turn escalations into dice rolls for who gets to die
You obviously need a gun with the same caliber bullet to stop an incoming gun shot. Have you not even read Newton’s laws of motion?
I dont think I’m American enough to understand this. How does wanting people to have freedom to use their systems as they please correlate with everyone being able to own and freely carry weapons that can kill instantly?
Yeah it’s like saying if you support free software, you support companies to not pay taxes or companies putting nicotine in products.
deleted by creator
to put it blatantly. Pro 2A people (they should, on paper at least, in practice a significant portion of them are cunts and shouldn’t be allowed in the community but that’s a different rant all together) support the idea that people have rights. specifically to do with guns.
There is a very fundamental overlap in the whole “i believe i should be able to run whatever software i want, with no restrictions” and “i believe i should be allowed to own guns with minimal restrictions” crowds. It’s that simple, doesn’t matter whether you agree with it or not. If you’re a linux user, and you support open source software, and believe users should have rights. You automatically have a pretty significant moral overlap with pro 2A people. (on paper, again, fuck it, im ranting about it)
Also, minor nitpick, they don’t kill instantly, they certainly can. But if i shoot you in the toe, you probably won’t keel over and die immediately. That’s a gross mischaracterization of them.
The following is a tangential rant, feel free to ignore, it’s about gun owners being cunts. There is a non insignificant portion of the gun community who, when presented with the concept of “everybody should be taught gun safety, because it’s a right granted to us” relating specifically to (liberals edit, i misspoke here, i meant republicans, LOL) (go figure) happen to get really fucking antsy at the thought of people they don’t like owning guns.
Now i feel like i don’t have to explain why this is maybe a very bad thing. But to put it bluntly, there are two good solutions here. Ban guns forever, permanently (which i disagree with, but that’s just my opinion on it) or, make it accessible to everybody, and give everyone access to them, and the materials required to be safe and responsible with them. Because after all, gun safety, is what keeps us safe when using them. While im sure the latter would make some amount of gun owning republicans uneasy, i propose they get a taste of their own fucking medicine.
it has fuck all to do with " people they don’t like owning guns." it has fucking everything to do with people unqualified and unsafe to own guns being able to obtain guns - whether through gun show loopholes, straw buyers, no yellow/red flag laws, etc.
fuck outa here with liberals getting antsy bullshit. if you weren’t paying attention, there’s a fucking gun violence epidemic going on, every fucking week there’s another mass shooting.
if that’s liberals getting antsy, maybe you should fucking wake up and realize this bullshit only happens here. bellend.
It’s written in a messy way but I actually read it the opposite way.
There is a non insignificant portion of the gun community who, when presented with the concept of “everybody should be taught gun safety, because it’s a right granted to us” relating specifically to liberals (go figure) happen to get really fucking antsy at the thought of people they don’t like owning guns.
I think what @KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com meant was that the 2A people don’t seem to be very interested in defending gun rights for people outside their circles. I don’t know if I’d use liberals as the example here. I think Black people would be far more salient.
Did the NRA Support a 1967 ‘Open Carry’ Ban in California? | Snopes.com
While 1967 was a long time ago, the “antsiness” has remained. How often do you hear of these people doing anything to defend the people who are the primary targets of anti gun laws? Which is, by a large margin, Black and other racialized people.
I heard an interview with some Public Defenders who had submitted an amicus brief in relation to a guns rights case on the basis that even though the actual case was stupid, changing the law would materially improve the lives of overincarcerted communities. I thought it was on 5-4 podcast in follow up to the first ep that covered the case in a less friendly way: New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v. Bruen. I don’t find the subsequent ep where they had the PDs on for an interview… maybe it was taken down.
Reagan and the NRA were all about gun control when it was Black Panthers.
I just want sane controls preventing nutbags from acquiring arsenals. I’m not anti-gun, I’m a prior service gun loving person who’s watching the idiots ruin it for the rest of us.
i wish it was less about posturing, and more about the underlying fundamental reasons.
You’re a republican that owns a gun, that’s cool, i didn’t ask, lets go do something that we can enjoy together instead.
posturing, and more about the underlying fundamental reasons.
this is why we fail: you assume it’s posturing. it’s not fucking posturing.
https://abcnews.go.com/US/gun-violence-claimed-lives-5000-people-2024/story?id=107262776
this pretty much. I used liberals specifically because that was an actual example of where i had seen it crop up. It applies broadly to “people they don’t like” however.
My main complaint here was that people who supposedly defend the rights that everybody have, get hypocritical about it, when presented with something that counters their personal beliefs. Directly contradicting their whole argument related to 2A.
it has fuck all to do with " people they don’t like owning guns." it has fucking everything to do with people unqualified and unsafe to own guns being able to obtain guns - whether through gun show loopholes, straw buyers, no yellow/red flag laws, etc.
you misunderstood my point here. The problem here is people who support 2A, and then immediately double back when presented with a group of people they don’t vibe with and go “uhm, ok, maybe they shouldn’t have guns, i think”
fuck outa here with liberals getting antsy bullshit. if you weren’t paying attention, there’s a fucking gun violence epidemic going on, every fucking week there’s another mass shooting.
that was a typo, lol, i skill issued. My bad.
Gun people and Open Source people both can appreciate the right to repair, although Americans, particularly southerners, have a certain tendency to have more gunowners across the land than people who can libreboot a chromebook. Both groups of people can use their devices for good or bad, and I think that was the original message the oop failed to relay; I don’t really know what they think they’re saying.
I see what you’re saying… I’m picking up what you’re putting down…
There’s an overlap of free rights to freedom and free rights to guns, but I think that they’re on different fields.
I agree with you, surprisingly, about a lot of what you said. But guns are a weird subject for a lot of people. The issue that is always brought up is that guns are designed to kill. The counter is good safety foundation, training, and practice. The counter to that is, humans are stupid greedy assholes.
For the sake of conversation, I’m mixed. I have guns myself but I treat them with respect. My kids know how to handle them and can cite the rules of gun ownership. The guns are locked up at all times. My family does the same. I can’t imagine that everyone is doing the same thing.
Jordan Klepper noted that a firm overlap on both sides is stricter regulatory control of deeper background checks, but the NRA makes this impossible. Jordan Klepper Solves Guns.
I agree with you, surprisingly, about a lot of what you said. But guns are a weird subject for a lot of people. The issue that is always brought up is that guns are designed to kill. The counter is good safety foundation, training, and practice. The counter to that is, humans are stupid greedy assholes.
like wise you could argue that censorship resistant platforms, self hosting, and e2e encryption can cause acts of violence to be carried out against people. I don’t see anybody complaining about that though, that’s just an understood cause and effect of having freedom in regards to censorship. Shitty people exist, they will proceed to be shitty. You can censor them, but if you want to maintain truly uncensored speech, you must allow them to speak, unfortunately.
There is always a benefit, and a negative to any action taken. Guns can indeed kill people, you can argue they were made to kill, but you can also argue that the vast majority of guns in existence have never once killed a person. And therefore, statistically, are probably safer than a lot of other things. Like eating junk food.
Like you said, you treat guns with respect, because they can be dangerous, much like someone who interacts with powertools on the regular, understands the dangers of powertools, and how they can be used to hurt people, intentionally or otherwise. Just like when creating open source software, or using it, you have to respect it’s licensing, and use it appropriately.
The lack of respect is certainly a problem, but it is drastically upset when republicans, who disproportionately, understand gun safety, and utilize it to their benefit (as they should) don’t want to educate people they don’t find very appealing on how to be safe with them. Which not only leads to potential self inflicted dangers and injuries, but also potentially to others as well. If we want everyone to be safe and respectful of guns, we can’t simply ignore an entire segment of the population, it just doesn’t matter. You can’t justify that.
putting them on different fields is certainly understandable, they are different things after all, but i think it’s important to consider the underlying structures and mechanisms behind something, and seeing how those can be effectively applied elsewhere, if for no other reason than to prevent bias and hypocrisy. As well as ensuring consistent beliefs. Seeing as a non-insignificant portion of gun owning republicans seem to be experiencing this issue right now. I would say that’s fair.
I know this is about to sound stupid but I promise it isn’t as dumb as it sounds.
Guns are not designed to kill, nothing is designed to kill. Guns were designed to propel a projectile at incredible velocities, they were INVENTED to kill. What you do with the gun is what makes the difference.
i’ve never really found that argument compelling tbh. Guns are designed to kill.
So are knives, and machetes. And daggers, swords, etc… Nobody ever complains about those. Mostly because they have other uses, and aren’t in particularly heavy use.
I mean hell, you could argue a car is designed to kill people. F150s are a big contender there.
So you mean to tell me that knives and machetes are primarily used to kill people every day instead of cutting rope, vines, etc?
Cars were designed to kill people? Is that why the 1894 velo was designed? To kill people? Definitely not designed to transport people I guess. If you walk in front of a train going even 15 mph, your corpse would be so destroyed that it would not even be recognizable. Are trains designed to kill then?
Hell, by your logic, anything that has the capability to kill is designed to kill, did you know that if you drink too much water, you can die? Guess water’s designed to kill too, I guess.
Guns have uses besides killing, the very presence of a firearm is a deterrant, that alone is a purpose that is given besides killing. I don’t agree with it, and I don’t even think everyone should just have easy access to firearms, but they definitely work for that purpose. Mentally unstable folks, it won’t work on those, but is that really the fault of guns themselves, or our country’s lackluster healthcare system, especially with the stigma around seeking mental help? A lack of access to guns is not going to stop someone from trying to kill someone, I am telling you that it is not. At the end of the day, external factors like economical reasons, mental health problems, stress related factors such as family issues, social issues, or work related issues, that’s what even drives people to do crimes like mass shootings in the first place.
Honestly, I could give less of a shit if guns even got taken away, but at the end of the day, there is still a problem to be dealt with and that is people who need help are not getting it, and as a result, are suffering.
So you mean to tell me that knives and machetes are primarily used to kill people every day instead of cutting rope, vines, etc?
Cars were designed to kill people? Is that why the 1894 velo was designed? To kill people? Definitely not designed to transport people I guess. If you walk in front of a train going even 15 mph, your corpse would be so destroyed that it would not even be recognizable. Are trains designed to kill then?
Hell, by your logic, anything that has the capability to kill is designed to kill, did you know that if you drink too much water, you can die? Guess water’s designed to kill too, I guess.
this is exactly my point. It’s such a broad and wide reaching statement, that it completely excludes sport, and hunting. As well as defense, from what guns were designed to do. It’s just frankly a stupid statement to make.
Guns were not designed to defend, they were designed to, once again, fire a projectile.
deleted by creator
That is the controversy about them. Essentially they’re super fast slingshots.
Again, I agree. It comes down to rights though.
Guns, to me, could maybe be paired with cars. You don’t need cars. Nobody needs to go that fast. Cars kill people. Cars ruin the environment. Etc.
Pretty much lol. At the end of the day, an object that you use with a purpose is a tool, what you use that tool to accomplish, i.e. running someone over with a car, bashing someone’s head in with a hammer, or shooting someone with a gun, that’s what is important. I won’t comment on the gun rights thing because I honestly think I’ve spent too much time in my life talking about it, but I think something that gets overlooked that could help alleviate the problem is widespread mental healthcare and awareness!
Unfortunately, that will probably never happen though.
deleted by creator
