this post was submitted on 15 Apr 2024
404 points (96.3% liked)

News

23259 readers
3316 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. 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. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Colorado’s Democratic-controlled House on Sunday passed a bill that would ban the sale and transfer of semiautomatic firearms, a major step for the legislation after roughly the same bill was swiftly killed by Democrats last year. 

The bill, which passed on a 35-27 vote, is now on its way to the Democratic-led state Senate. If it passes there, it could bring Colorado in line with 10 other states — including California, New York and Illinois — that have prohibitions on semiautomatic guns. 

But even in a state plagued by some of the nation’s worst mass shootings, such legislation faces headwinds.

Colorado’s political history is purple, shifting blue only recently. The bill’s chances of success in the state Senate are lower than they were in the House, where Democrats have a 46-19 majority and a bigger far-left flank. Gov. Jared Polis, also a Democrat, has indicated his wariness over such a ban.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] TSG_Asmodeus@lemmy.world -2 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (21 children)

Do you think the cops are gonna disarm neonazis? Or will they just use gun bans as an excuse to murder more black people?

You think black people with firearms are less likely to be shot by police?

The goal isn’t to beat the cops. It’s to defend against neonazis.

How's that going? Because from the outside, it looks like this.

image

[–] Olhonestjim@lemmy.world 6 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (10 children)

Do you not think cops are more likely to kill black people if there's a gun ban regardless whether they are armed?

Yes, I'm well aware of how it looks. They are trying to use public massacres to ignite a civil war. Of course it's horrible.

And yet we do almost nothing to prosecute their talking heads who incite those same shootings and the billionaires who fund their rallies. Because hate speech is still somehow free speech. We need to clean up the loopholes in the first amendment before addressing the second.

Trump is campaigning to become the next fuhrer, not president, yet you dingalings are bound and determined to make sure that we're disarmed in advance. How stupid is that?

[–] TSG_Asmodeus@lemmy.world -4 points 6 months ago (9 children)

Do you not think cops are more likely to kill black people if there’s a gun ban regardless whether they are armed?

That's some wicked grammar there, but... no? Why would the cops kill less black people if specific firearms are banned?

They are trying to use school shootings to ignite a civil war.

What?

Also, I feel Americans need to see this, and maybe consider that all these children dying isn't necessary for their hobby or 'self defense' claims:

USA has eight times the rate (as in percentage, not total_ of firearms deaths as Canada, which has more strict firearms rules. Canada has one-hundred times the rate of firearms deaths of the UK, which has more strict firearms rules.

That means the USA has 800 times the rare of firearms deaths as the UK. So when this mysterious 'civil war' happens, how many children will have died so that you can have that semi-auto AR-15 to fight off the drones of the American military, or the armoured vehicles of your cops?

Instead of pretending One Man With A Gun is going to do something, maybe try voting locally. Maybe try de-arming your cops?

[–] pokemaster787@ani.social 8 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Instead of pretending One Man With A Gun is going to do something

I used to agree with this train of thought, why be armed when the government has tanks?

But the realities of the past several years have shown us that an armed rebellion can be significantly more powerful. Look at Iraq and Afghanistan, look at Myanmar today where the rebel groups are literally 3D printing carbines. A guerilla group with small arms can put serious pressure on a modern military. Will lots of them die? Probably. Will they "win"? Probably not, but they could easily wear down the enemy with attrition. When you need to move a couple dozen men with rifles it's an entirely different game than coordinating 12 tanks and 500 men, you can employ completely different tactics. Especially on your home turf that you know inside and out.

Is an armed rebellion happening anytime soon? I sure hope not. But the threat that an armed populace can at the least put some serious hurt on a military/government is a deterrent to tyranny. Just the possibility of it is a huge deterrent, compared to authoritarian countries where citizens aren't armed and get run over by tanks.

I'm not saying gun violence isn't a huge problem, but saying armed citizenry is zero deterrent is just factually untrue.

[–] TSG_Asmodeus@lemmy.world -4 points 6 months ago (2 children)

But the realities of the past several years have shown us that an armed rebellion can be significantly more powerful. Look at Iraq and Afghanistan, look at Myanmar today where the rebel groups are literally 3D printing carbines.

Couple things, but mostly: 1. How free are people in Iraq and Afghanistan, exactly? 2. Rebel groups are illegally printing carbines. The legality of it is meaningless. They aren't taking on the US military on it's own soil.

If you guys are saying that making death-by-gun the most common form of death for children in the USA, even above cars is worth it for some maybe-one-day-we'll-be-a-militia-group seems like the most sad and specious logic I've ever heard. I'm a parent and theoretically fighting some imaginary war (which we've been hearing about for decade after decade...) takes a definite backseat to my kids making it through school un-shot-at.

And virtually every armed rebellion that worked happened in a nation where firearms were heavily restricted, so the laws are meaningless. Hell you could only own a smoothbore shotgun at most in the soviet union, and last I checked a whole bunch of those countries had armed rebellions.

[–] Olhonestjim@lemmy.world 8 points 6 months ago (1 children)

I'm not arguing against gun bans because I love guns. I'm arguing against them because humanity has a serious problem with fascism. I'm pointing out that fascists are heavily armed. The cops are almost entirely fascist sympathizers. They selectively enforce gun bans across racial and ideological lines, just like the Nazis did in Germany. They don't take guns away from Nazis. Instead, they use those laws to gun down minorities.

Oh hey, who's that? Why, is that a psychopathic fascist running for president? I wonder what would happen if he won again, and minorities and leftists were selectively disarmed and his neo-nazi followers weren't? But how could that ever happen? Cops are there to protect us from bad guys, right?

[–] bastion@feddit.nl 6 points 6 months ago

Yeah. Violence is generally not the answer. But when it is, it's the only answer.

[–] bastion@feddit.nl 5 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

Compare your image above with something extremely similar happening systematically, over and over and over as a populace is rounded up and shipped off to camps.

It sucks. Both situations suck. But disarming yourself isn't the solution.

Be armed. Be reasonable, and prefer to de-escalate. But also be willing to fight.

load more comments (7 replies)
load more comments (7 replies)
load more comments (17 replies)