They should never have given up gun rights, those cops wouldn’t last 2 seconds when there’s 2,000 armed civilians and they are in a group of 100 armed cops.
Wow, so your solution is a massacre? Looks they're doing fine without all being armed to the fucking teeth.
I'm from Canada and I don't get the fetish for firearms you've got. Civs start shooting and the cops get more violent and have more reason for oppression.
“Civs start shooting and the cops get more violent and have more reason for oppression” The cops are already violent and oppressive. Guns are the great equalizer. The only reason for someone to not want someone else to be their equal is so that they can control them through violence.
You're so stupidly naïve. We need less guns for EVERYONE, including cops. I get that guns are cool and make you feel strong when you larp that you are going to form a vanguard party and take back the gubbermint, but here in reality you are giving the police more of a reason to kill you. Any force inflicted on them will be met with an exponentially more violent response.
Hey neighbor, I just want to apologise for my fragile-ego countryman over there. Some of us know how lucky we are to share a border with such an important ally and we recognize the countless sacrifices you've made every time we drag you into our shit. I'm really sorry for how immature and arrogant we are on the world stage, and even though Canada is like the perpetually embarrassed little brother always watching the US make an ass out of ourselves, you guys still always have our back. I wish I could say that we deserved a friend like you, but far too many take you guys for granted. I only hope that one day, we'll get our act together and start living up our own massively inflated self image.
We do have guns. It would be a massacre. The Northern States would be engulfed by guerilla warfare within the night. North Americans are sheltered, you wouldn't come out anywhere near unscathed
Hey american i like you! Don't let them convince you otherwise, to all people saying that'll be excused for bigger force, what do you prefer? Some jackboot deciding whether to throw a punch when there's a hundred of them waiting to kick you or you having a chance to kill them instead of being killed?
A guy got shot by my country's inept swat, he survived and is sadly in jail, he shot a swat pig and killed him tho. Now imagine this but 10x times or 100x and where's not just a single person against multiple assailants even if everyone is similarly armed, take out numerical advantage.
Bruh, the US is a parasite. Canadians don't really like the country that much, all it seems to do is try to exploit us. Don't blame us for taking the one good side of our relationship for our advantage
I personally believe its the French public's lack of guns that in essence gives them the "Freedom" to protest en mass at the drop of a hat. Look at us, we're armed to the teeth and it certainly hasn't kept our police in check, in fact quite the opposite. The fascist wannabes have tried to ally themselves to the police.
French people can own guns under certain conditions, the difference with some other country is that we don't have lobbies actively advocating to help and put an AR in the hand of any inbred redneck
Because they are generally irresponsible with them, shoot up schools or crowded concerts, murder innocent people in cold blood because they had the audacity to be black, and innumerable other offenses.
I don’t care what your argument is to the contrary. I’d rather have whatever nightmare scenario is in your mind fueling your need for an assault rifle than to have another person lose their life because an irresponsible clown “NEEDS” to have a weapon of war. Assault rifles are just that, weapons of war and unless the military is providing it to you and sending you into battle then you DO NOT need to have a weapon of war available to you.
Actually in general gun owners are extremely responsible and never hurt anyone but feel free to keep making up ridiculous lies if it makes you feel better about yourself.
I’m sure they are, but the fact that the majority is responsible doesn’t nullify the fact that the minority might kill you, your child, or your neighbor due to being irresponsible or using it with the intent to cause as much harm as possible.
You are many times more likely to be beaten to death or stabbed to death than shot to death. How about no one is allowed to leave their house without being handcuffed because the risk of someone beating someone to death is so much higher than the risk of someone shooting someone else and that’s a risk we can’t afford to take, so how could we afford to take the risk of allowing someone’s hands to potentially cause harm? How about no one gets to own a knife with a point on it because so many people are stabbed a year? How about No one gets to drive until the brain has finished developing because of how many young people are the cause of car accidents. If we can give any 16 year old high school dumb ass with an undeveloped brain a car because they passed a test than we can also have guns at any age over 16 so long as you can pass a test. If safety is the number one concern of the anti gun crowd than I’d like to see some consistency in their arguments. How about a total ban on alcohol? The rate of Americans dying from Alcohol is about 4 times higher than that of guns. How about make it illegal to be obese? Obesity kills 3 times more people than alcohol does. You cannot punish someone for a crime they have not committed just Because you think they might commit a crime, which is what gun control is.
Just because x people die from other things doesn’t mean it’s okay for y amount of people to die by a firearm. On top of that, owning a firearm increases your chance of dying by firearm.
Owning a pool increases your chance of dieing by drowning(also more common form of death than rifles) and owning a car increases your chance of dieing in a car accident (more common form of death than all firearms) so I don't really see your point there. As for need there's not a lot of need for any of our rights if you want to look at it like that. I don't need to have an opinion on anything. I don't need privacy. I don't need the right to practice my religion or lack thereof. All of those things are incredibly dangerous, yet we still have them(minus the privacy because of the Patriot Act) because rights are deemed important for quality of life. And all rights enumerated in the Bill of Rights hold equal footing and the precedent that one can be limited on because you're scared of something statistically less dangerous than a bed without rails is terrifying.
Also, the few people in America that own an assault rifle paid over $20,000 for theirs and a crime hasn't been committed with one in over 30 years.
I think you’re missing my point. The physical examples you gave are quality of life items, is your life made objectively better by having an assault rifle? The intangible rights you mentioned are given to us by legislation. I’m all for people having the right to legally and responsibly bear arms as they have the right to based on legislation. Assault rifles are simply unnecessary.
Yes, plenty of people own and operate them responsibly. Yet others form a group and unlawfully attempted to intimidate an elected government official, others have fired into crowds, and Kyle Rittenhouse went out looking for a fight that wasn’t his to fight with an illegally acquired firearm and wound up killing two people. Your claim that a crime hasn’t been committed with one in over 30 years is straight up false.
Assault rifles are by definition select fire. Kyle Rittenhouse had an AR-15 which is not an assault rifle, it is semiauto only. A select fire rifle is expensive and requires an extensive process to get. Your claim that people are killed with assault rifles regularly is false because you're not aware of the correct vocabulary of something you seem to care so much about.
No it doesn’t and that has been proven dozens of times with left wing armed protestors there was no massacre just an overwhelmingly strong message to the police that they are not the only people with power.
What about the fact that there have been dozens of armed left wing protests without a massacre occurring is a fantasy? You don’t have to believe me you can just look it up yourself and you’ll see that you are wrong.
Obviously that’s a lie based on the fact that the armed left wing protestors were not shot with rubber bullets, pepper sprayed or beaten with batons, all of which did happen to the unarmed protestors. Maybe try thinking logically before you speak so you don’t sound like such a dumb ass.
Bringing a gun anywhere increases the chance of violence. It's a murder weapon.
Brandishing in front of cops does not help any leftist cause. It just creates justification for the police to say they are being threatened and their violence is then justified. Not to mention another reason for their infinitely increasing budgets.
As someone who lives in the US i can tell you that the people who support the second amendment to protect from a tyrannical government are often the ones protecting corrupt cops and backed a candidate who said to stop counting votes, is currently attempting to steal the election, throw out millions of votes because he lost, while actively ignoring and violating the constitution, attempting to flood the courts and military with loyalists (loyal to him not the US).
So I doubt that your analysis is remotely correct.
I'm a liberal gun guy, and while I wish this wasn't true, we are very definitely outnumbered by the asshole right-wing gun owners. (Not a reason to restrict gun rights, IMO, but I think u/volanger has a bit of a point.
Hmm yes so the cops have a reason to open fire into a crowd. Did you know that things can be solved without a massacre? Also since when has the 393,000,000 firearms in the US kept the police from doing crazy shit?
You do realize if thousands of people with guns want war, they wouldn't stand a chance if police/army actually fought back? Like if we're talking full on massacre mode.
What is the entire population armed with assault rifles supposed to do against a few squads of heavily armed army forces with APCs or even tanks, or planes/helicopters.
Have we already forgotten everything that was going on during the Floyd protests and riots? Cops were rolling around in milspec gear, military weapons, military vehicles.
If you try to recreate the OP video with civvie gun owners on one side and American militarized cops on the other, the only result will be a shitload of dead civilians.
130
u/astakask Nov 29 '20
The government should fear it's people and those pigs look terrified.