this post was submitted on 25 Mar 2026
1212 points (94.4% liked)

Comic Strips

23371 readers
4172 users here now

Comic Strips is a community for those who love comic stories.

Rules
  1. 😇 Be Nice!

    • Treat others with respect and dignity. Friendly banter is okay, as long as it is mutual; keyword: friendly.
  2. 🏘️ Community Standards

    • Comics should be a full story, from start to finish, in one post.
    • Posts should be safe and enjoyable by the majority of community members, both here on lemmy.world and other instances.
    • Any comic that would qualify as raunchy, lewd, or otherwise draw unwanted attention by nosy coworkers, spouses, or family members should be tagged as NSFW.
    • Moderators have final say on what and what does not qualify as appropriate. Use common sense, and if need be, err on the side of caution.
  3. 🧬 Keep it Real

    • Comics should be made and posted by real human beans, not by automated means like bots or AI. This is not the community for that sort of thing.
  4. 📽️ Credit Where Credit is Due

    • Comics should include the original attribution to the artist(s) involved, and be unmodified. Bonus points if you include a link back to their website. When in doubt, use a reverse image search to try to find the original version. Repeat offenders will have their posts removed, be temporarily banned from posting, or if all else fails, be permanently banned from posting.
    • Attributions include, but are not limited to, watermarks, links, or other text or imagery that artists add to their comics to use for identification purposes. If you find a comic without any such markings, it would be a good idea to see if you can find an original version. If one cannot be found, say so and ask the community for help!
  5. 📋 Post Formatting

    • Post an image, gallery, or link to a specific comic hosted on another site; e.g., the author's website.
    • Meta posts about the community should be tagged with [Meta] either at the beginning or the end of the post title.
    • When linking to a comic hosted on another site, ensure the link is to the comic itself and not just to the website; e.g.,
      ✅ Correct: https://xkcd.com/386/
      ❌ Incorrect: https://xkcd.com/
  6. 📬 Post Frequency/SPAM

    • Each user (regardless of instance) may post up to five (5 🖐) comics a day. This can be any combination of personal comics you have written yourself, or other author's comics. Any comics exceeding five (5 🖐) will be removed.
  7. 🏴‍☠️ Internationalization (i18n)

    • Non-English posts are welcome. Please tag the post title with the original language, and include an English translation in the body of the post; e.g.,
      Sí, por favor [Spanish/Español]
  8. 🍿 Moderation

    • We are human, just like most everybody else on Lemmy. If you feel a moderation decision was made in error, you are welcome to reach out to anybody on the moderation team for clarification. Keep in mind that moderation decisions may be final.
    • When reporting posts and/or comments, quote which rule is being broken, and why you feel it broke the rules.
Web Accessibility

Note: This is not a rule, but a helpful suggestion.

When posting images, you should strive to add alt-text for screen readers to use to describe the image you're posting:

Another helpful thing to do is to provide a transcription of the text in your images, as well as brief descriptions of what's going on. (example)

Web of Links

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] glitchdx@lemmy.world 15 points 3 weeks ago (7 children)

Arguing that the populace shouldn't have guns, and pointing to the usa as an example, is arguing that our fascist government should have a monopoly on violence. Every successful "gun control" law has been put in place in response to persecuted minorities and activist groups having guns. For a famous example, see the Black Panthers.

Peaceful protests are impotent unless backed by a genuine threat of violence. See how little the recent "No Kings" protests have accomplished vs the death of that one health insurance ceo.

Now, I am in favor of fewer guns, but the order of operations is important. Let's start with disarming the police and abolishing ice. So long as my friends/family/neighbors/whatevers are being abducted by masked thugs in broad daylight, it is my right and my duty to defend with lethal force.

[–] carrylex@lemmy.world 10 points 3 weeks ago

Peaceful protests are impotent unless backed by a genuine threat of violence

Eastern europe (exluding Romania) would like to have a word.

[–] Nalivai@lemmy.world 10 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

Oh yeah, and all yours 1.2 guns per person are doing absolute wonders right now, when you pedo in charge is rounding up people to put in concentration camps and starting wars all over the world. All your guns will start working any time now, liberating you from fascism.

[–] chicken@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

The utility of gun rights as a potential defense against tyranny isn't proven to be zero by the existence of tyranny, because guns are not a complete solution. I think it's likely they would be rounding up more people by now, with less expense and difficulty, if Americans didn't have guns.

[–] Nalivai@lemmy.world -1 points 3 weeks ago

This is the same circular reasoning, with the added bonus of "all the countrepoints are actually points in my favour because I would like it to be so".
The reason they are able to be so aggressive, the reason they're so militarised, the reason they start interaction with people guns first is because they have an excuse of "well, everyone can be armed, we need to be prepared". And now they used it to build an army against you, that you can't do anything about.
You let them do it, thinking you can stop them using guns somehow, when the time comes, not realising that the time came long ago and you were very busy stroking your guns and killing each other to notice.

[–] Skankhunt420@sh.itjust.works 3 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

It would have already crumbled to the ground in the 1900's if we didn't have them.

The US government cares only about money. They don't give a fuck about us, as evidenced by our healthcare system.

We are expendable to them. Had we not have the guns we have now I truly believe it would have all ended for us a lot sooner and be significantly worse than it is now.

I know other countries manage. Other countries aren't managed by a bunch of rich pedophiles that will let children and people die for the sake of "saving" $50 on an insurance claim.

Tell you what how about this, how about they take the guns from the police and ice and IRS and dea and atf and then we can sure talk about getting rid of our guns. But that will never ever happen.

[–] axx@slrpnk.net 0 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

A "well armed militia" that is completely and willingly surveiled by private corporations that work with the government is fundamentally, critically impaired.

The fact gun nuts harp on about what is, at this point, a fantasy of rising against tyrannical government while being nearly completely blind to operational matters like communication, organisation, surveillance, etc. is frankly ridiculous.

If these people were serious about this, they'd be building infrastructure, communication systems, etc.

[–] Skankhunt420@sh.itjust.works 3 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

I agree communication and organization are key as well and I try to make that point to everyone I can. I try not to be too preachy about it but any chance I get to talk about Meshnetworks and E2E encryption I make sure to let people know it is the way.

Two things can be true at the same time, though. Organization is key but so is an effective way to defend yourself. And if necessary, kill those who are trying to kill you and the people you have organized.

I asked another guy this too but consider that nowhere in the history of humanity has any society ever overthrown an empire/government the size of the United States without many, many deaths and a lot of violence.

So you can call me a gun nut but if you want to talk about fantasy, let's talk about how peaceful solutions don't ever fucking work to get rid of oppressive governments. Literally, never. Not one single time in the history of humanity. Maybe like some small island nation or something but talking about your Roman Empires and your French Monarchy's.

So at the end of the day dude your suggestion isn't grounded in reality. I'm sorry that its that way, I wish it wasn't either. But it is what it is.

[–] axx@slrpnk.net 1 points 2 weeks ago

I have no idea what the last four paragraphs are replying to.

Mate, I made no suggestions, you just went off on your merry horse there :)

[–] Nalivai@lemmy.world -2 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

It would have already crumbled to the ground in the 1900’s if we didn’t have them.

Remind me, what exactly did you do with your guns in the 1900s to prevent tyranny? I don't remember any armed uprising against a dictator in 1900s.
If you weren't so busy running around shooting each other with your precious guns, you might be able to see the depths your country fell into and maybe do something about it, but you didn't, because you were hoping that when "the tyrant" comes you can just shoot him with your trusty remmington, but when tyrant comes, you only cheer him on

[–] Skankhunt420@sh.itjust.works 2 points 3 weeks ago

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Athens_(1946)

Granted though, most of them happened during the 1800's I Will admit that your Whiskey Rebellions and what not.

But had those things not happened before and even the flex of the muscles in '46 I'm telling you we would have been one of the most oppressive shitholes ever around already.

And also the thing is, we straight up wouldn't even be an independent nation had we not had guns to fight the british so having guns is literally why we exist as an independent nation to begin with.

And see that's where youre wrong, I do see the depths it has slid into and that is why I am going to have a gun here. Its easy not to when you don't live near a major metropolitan city that has insane crime around every corner.

You see I think about the way things actually work, in practice not just on paper. And I know by using that thought process that when they "take guns" every gang member and drug dealer is still going to have one all that would do is make it to where normal people with children can't protect themselves against criminals with guns anymore.

That's the true reason they haven't gotten rid of them yet. The government here no longer wants you to have them but they know that by banning them only the worst of the worst will have them and frankly even just the cops here having them and not the people make me nervous because they kill us all the time already, with zero remorse or consequences of any kind.

If the DEA can't stop drugs from entering the ATF isn't stopping guns from entering and that's just facts. Only criminals will be able to get them then just like only criminals can get drugs now. People can call you gun nut or whatever but that is just cold hard facts man and I'm sorry that its true.

[–] BenLeMan@lemmy.world 9 points 3 weeks ago (3 children)

So where is the well-regulated militia defending the United States with their huge arsenal of guns? We're not hearing anything about valiant protectors of the constitution taking up arms against the domestic enemies that are ICE, MAGA, etc...it's almost as if the whole spiel about needing guns to resist a tyrannical government was BS all along. 🤔

[–] Skankhunt420@sh.itjust.works 7 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (1 children)

You didn't see the like 3 or 4 multiple attempts at taking the pedophilic orange man out?

They tried. Maybe one of them will eventually succeed.

Also I'd like to point out that I noticed the ICE goons haven't went to the hood yet. Let's see how that plays out for them.

[–] BenLeMan@lemmy.world 2 points 3 weeks ago

Unfortunately this man is not the issue. It's the culture that allows him to do what he is doing. Everybody knows who he is and what he stands for. But he's still not dangling from the gallows, so clearly the system has failed to correct itself.

He will die eventually, probably from one hamberder too many but the troubles won't be over then.

[–] wakko@lemmy.world 6 points 3 weeks ago

The option going unused doesn't invalidate the need for the option to be there, moron.

Some people make it pretty clear that the only thing they understand is forced behaviors. Almost like what they're really after is eradication of individual choices on favor of top-down uniformity.

I'm pretty sure there's a name for that kind of centrally held power....

[–] CascadiaRo@lemmy.zip 1 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

Man, I see this sort of thing commented all the time as some sort of “gotcha” and really have to wonder what it is you’re envisioning.

Put yourself in the shoes of a firearm owner for a moment. Evidently, you believe the US has passed a tipping point where violent resistance is necessary.

Where are you going with your gun and who are you shooting at?

[–] Nalivai@lemmy.world 7 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

And just like that, we went complete route from "without guns we can't fight fascism" to "guns are actually completely useless in fighting fascism" in two comments.

[–] CascadiaRo@lemmy.zip 0 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (1 children)

US - 1765 to 1784

EU - 1939 to 1945

Vietnam - 1955 to 1975

Yes, I’m aware that only one of these cases was literal fascism.

You can see my other comment in this chain, but firearms are the “last stand” tools to fight oppression. We’re in the midst of a particularly sensitive stage and, in my opinion, haven’t crossed the “tipping point” where a violent response would be wise or justified.

[–] Nalivai@lemmy.world 0 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Bloody hell, are you for fucking real, WWII, seriously? The global war fought by armies has something to do with public having guns?
Fucking Vietnam? US losing a military campaign on the other side of the world is a testament of how useful it is for Americans to have guns? And then american fucking revolution, that I can't even imagine how to tie in.
I just hope for the sake of sanity that you're trolling.

[–] CascadiaRo@lemmy.zip -1 points 3 weeks ago

I do concede that WWII was not fought and won by armed civilians, I was largely responding to “without guns we can’t fight fascism” and can see that, in the greater context of the thread, that might be less relevant. I do think the French Resistance would have been better equipped if they hadn’t had to rely on smuggled or captured weapons. A full scale invasion is going to pan out differently when most civilians are able to shoot back or organize into militia.

Vietnam is a testament to the fact that multiple military superpowers can still lose to a lesser armed (but still armed) populace.

And then the american fucking revolution, that I can’t even imagine how to tie in

This is where you really have me stumped and should maybe do some reading into US history, fighting this war is the foundational experience that led to the creation of the second amendment. Here’s a good place to start:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battles_of_Lexington_and_Concord

[–] BenLeMan@lemmy.world 4 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Are you saying you're suffering a dearth of targets?

Again, if this is not the time to exercise your supposed God-given right to bear arms to ward off a tyrannical government then the whole point of the 2nd Amendment is moot.

I've said it before: You guys aren't going to vote your way out of this pickle. I hate to say this (sincerely!) but this is going to end in violence one way or another. 🙁

[–] CascadiaRo@lemmy.zip 4 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

You didn’t answer the question.

Am I to infer that you think that right now is an appropriate time to actively seek out and shoot ICE agents?

[–] BenLeMan@lemmy.world 1 points 3 weeks ago

You could try flowers and hugs instead, I guess? Whatever works best.

[–] njm1314@lemmy.world 0 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

With how subtle you are you might as well work for the FBI.

[–] reksas@sopuli.xyz 6 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

no he got a point. If someone started doing that they would just get captured and tortured or killed. What can you meaningfully achieve with random violence, alone? Owning a gun will not help you protect yourself against force that can hunt you down and use your loved ones as leverage. Its just copium so people dont organize thinking they have power to protect themselves if things get bad but they never will use it because they are alone and scared, rightfully so.

[–] CascadiaRo@lemmy.zip 1 points 3 weeks ago

I see that as a cop-out to engagement in discourse, an alt account and VPN/privacy technologies would be enough to shield someone from “taking the bait”

My own opinion is that we have not reached a point where that level of response is justifiable, and I think it’s incredibly dangerous and irresponsible to suggest that it is.

The administration’s current rhetoric revolves around the domestic terrorist threat / violent insurrectionist motif that, while some people may buying into, is not being substantiated with strong evidence.

At this time, violent response / uprising by those perceived to be “on the left” will add fuel to validate that propaganda machine, it will firmly entrench the beliefs of those who might otherwise have a chance of moving away from it, and it will likely trigger a heavy-handed response leading to a substantial and catastrophic loss of life and liberty.

Hypothetically, “with how subtle you are, you might as well” be an agitator seeking to be a catalyst to what I just described.

[–] RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world 5 points 3 weeks ago

Wow. How’s that gun ownership working against the fascist takeover of the US?

It isn’t?

Gun ownership has, in fact, been usurped by fascists and their supporters in furtherance of the takeover?

Next argument, please.

[–] oce@jlai.lu 3 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (1 children)

See how little the recent “No Kings” protests have accomplished vs the death of that one health insurance ceo.

What did the murder of this CEO accomplish?

[–] glitchdx@lemmy.world 1 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Lots of people got insurance claims approved, enabling them to get life saving care that otherwise would have been denied. It's just a shame that it was a one-off and not a recurring thing.

[–] oce@jlai.lu 2 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

I didn't know about that. Do you have a reliable source?

[–] glitchdx@lemmy.world 1 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

it was in the news when it happened

and also discussed a lot here