this post was submitted on 14 Jun 2024
264 points (97.8% liked)

News

36457 readers
2776 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 biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.


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. Clickbait titles may be removed.


Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.


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, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.


7. No duplicate posts.


If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. 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 or news aggregators.


All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.


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

I agree with the first part. It was supposed to be a check and balance to government power and oppression. It gives people the power to fight back against injustice.

However, in the time of intercontinental missiles, planes, tanks, and remote operated drones, are a bunch of peasants with guns actually going to do anything if the government turned on its people? Does the "right to bear arms" not extend to other, non-gun weapons?

[–] C126@sh.itjust.works 6 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

Yeah, you're bringing guns to an unmanned drone fight.

[–] Voran@lemmy.world 5 points 2 years ago (3 children)

Guns would at least cause some difficulty oppressing people.

[–] Hugh_Jeggs@lemm.ee 1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Gun owners are literally the most cowardly people on the planet

Yous are scared of your own fucking shadows

"Whatcha scared of, coward?" "Uh, just other cowards is all" 😂

[–] Voran@lemmy.world 3 points 2 years ago (2 children)

I don't own a gun. I'm from a country where it's not an option. To assume makes an ASS out of u and me.

Your point is bullshit. Not all people are good. Rapists exist. Serial killers exist. I'd like some options if I ever ran into one.

Imagine a world in which men could not own guns...

But women and intersex persons were given as many guns as they wanted for free.

What would it be like?

Probably better.

[–] secretlyaddictedtolinux@lemmy.world -1 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

yes, only people with the luxury of owning guns could not understand the terror of being unarmed

just because conservatives fight for a right doesn't mean it's bad. this is the 1 thing conservatives are right about

the problem is liberals don't take this as opportunity to promote more female gun ownership and tactical training. a society of armed women is a society of women who will learn math and possess their own bodies

[–] Hackworth@lemmy.world 1 points 2 years ago

/looks around - That doesn't seem to be the case. A.I. has a better chance of repositioning the social locus of control.

[–] ikidd@lemmy.world 3 points 2 years ago (1 children)
[–] Jimmyeatsausage@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

If ever there was a case for "more guns = more freedom", right?

[–] ikidd@lemmy.world 5 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Taliban or not, the peasants made it impossible for both Russia and the US to hold for any period of time using a pretty ancient rifle.

[–] Jimmyeatsausage@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I think the IEDs, suicide bombers, and RPGs made a bigger difference in both cases

[–] ikidd@lemmy.world 4 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Well, of course it wasn't just the rifle. But my point was that low-tech armaments (and terrain to an extent) didn't make it a walk in the park no matter how high-tech your military. You still have to hold it.