Comment by Akujin
9 years ago
And this is why in Germany you can't protest with any guns, military swat gear, masks, or other weapons. Doing so is illegal because a large group of people with weapons can intimidate another group into not being able to exercise their free speech.
How did that work out at the G20 protests?
Quite ok, actually. Nobody was killed. There were no "minutemen of the patriotic revolution" in fatigues and with automatic weapons. There were fantastic, peaceful protests such as https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SeXRmurPTRI
Yeah, there was property damage. So what?
Also, I'm not quite sure what you're actually trying to say? Are you suggesting the protests would have been /better/ if protesters had had automatic weapons?
You are deluding yourself when you call a protest with (significant, I might add) property damage fantastic and peaceful.
Are you not aware that multiple instances of arson were committed [1]?
Also:
> Yeah, there was property damage. So what?
What if this was your property? Would you be as callous if it had been your car that had been set on fire?
[1] http://www.reuters.com/article/us-g20-germany-protests-idUSK...
10 replies →
Semi-automatic weapons, not automatic.
With respect, this is a crucial point if one desires to be taken seriously by gun owners when talking about guns, because confusing it reveals a lack of basic knowledge of the subject.
Apart from some property damage and a few minor injuries it worked out pretty well. Nobody got killed and over the weekend only a single gunshot was fired (in the air). I dont want to imagine what would happen if a protest like the g20 one would clash with the police when guns are involved on both sides...
Great. The protests was free speech. The G20 and the interests they serve is what stiffles free speech.
Pretty well. Why?