Comment by miroljub
1 day ago
How?
In the UK, there's no right to bear arms, so people are pretty helpless against their oppressing government.
1 day ago
How?
In the UK, there's no right to bear arms, so people are pretty helpless against their oppressing government.
>> In the UK, there's no right to bear arms, so people are pretty helpless against their oppressing government.
There's a right to bear arms in the US and it doesn't seem to be helping them with their oppressive government.
Look into the Black Panthers. It actually does work quite effectively.
The Mulford Act (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mulford_Act), a California gun control act that prohibits open carry, was originally passed back in the 60s to disarm the Black Panthers.
The fact that I can’t tell if this is a joke speaks volumes.
You people cannot seriously be this poorly educated
How? the Black Panthers were infiltrated and undermined by COINTELPRO and effectively destroyed from within, meanwhile the white supremacist capitalist system they fought against persists.
Their biggest success as far as I know is starting free school lunches in the US, but that wasn't at gunpoint.
Ahh yes the murders of Alex Rackley and Betty Van Patter, truly brave and revolutionary acts!
It only works when the gun nuts aren’t on the side of the oppressors.
I feel like it's working pretty great
I'm sure shooting at the government would have solved this privacy issue.
Surprisingly, the people in the government don't much like being shot. See the reaction to the UHC CEO for an example.
It solved the taxation issue
As a green-card holder, it really didn't.
As far as I know Americans are still required to pay taxes, so no.
1 reply →
> In the UK, there's no right to bear arms, so people are pretty helpless against their oppressing government.
When people want to revolt it doesn’t seem like the right to bear arms has much to do with it. Not having the right to bear arms certainly hasn’t stopped countless rebellions and revolutions across the world. It’s not like the French of the Russians had a right to bear arms before their successful revolutions.
Even in the UK, the lack of a right to bear arms didn’t stop Cromwell using firearms to defeat Charles II at the Battle of Worcester.
I just dont interact with the government or British society at all. I have turned my back on it.
If they ever come to my door I'll either go postal or leave the country.
Its so bad here now.
We could try the American way, bear our arms and shoot up a school, but I don't see how that will help.
Because that’s working so well for the US
it's working really well, we don't get arrested for social media posts as far as I can tell
https://www.justice.gov/usao-edny/pr/social-media-influencer...
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c86l4p583y6o
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2021/1/19/holdindigenous-man-...
Yes you do
1 reply →
If that’s the bar then I guess yes it’s a resounding success for freedom.
2 replies →
Technically I guess you're right, but one hopes that the foundations of British democracy provide its citizens with the tools to fight against an oppressive government. The only rub is getting them to stand up and do that.
Like what? Britain is a constitutional monarchy. Its foundations anticipated an oppressive king, not an oppressive parliament. Britain never had a revolution, it never had free speech to begin with. It seems to me that what made Britain successful in the past is maladaptive to its current situation.
Guns are an inefficient/stupid way to kill people anyway.
Just ask Russia and Ukraine.
Look around, human beings are quite clever.
Small arms are no match for drones and a fully armed military, a successful rebellion by any populace against a first world military is impossible unless the military lays their arms down voluntarily, full stop.
Rebels are able to use techniques that a government never could or would. I think you underestimate the usefulness of small arms in guerilla warfare.
You underestimate the nasty things goverments have done.
I think you underestimate the lethality of remotely piloted drones with missiles and IR cameras and the futility of fighting against them.
2 replies →
Every time this argument comes up, I just feel like rolling eyes, it is so overplayed.
Yes, in a direct confrontation and an all out war, the populace stands no chance against the US military (assuming the military will unwaveringly side against the populace), no argument there.
But an all out war is not an option, the government wouldn’t be trying to pulverize an entire nation and leave a rubble in place. If you completely destroy your populace and your cities in an all-out direct war, you got no country and people left to govern. It is all about subjugation and populace control. You can’t achieve this with air strikes that level whole towns.
Similarly, if the US wanted to “win” in Afganistan by just glassing the whole region and capturing it, that would be rather quick and easy (from a technical perspective, not from the perspective of political consequences that would follow). Turns out, populace control and compliance are way more tricky to achieve than just capturing land. And while having overwhelming firepower and technological advantage helps with that, it isn’t enough.
I roll my eyes when I see this blissfully naive LARP/mallninja imagined scenario, but I do have to remind myself that the US was founded on the basis of forming a milita etc. and I would probably say the same thing if I had that upbringing. You forget that the vast majority of people are stupid and easily scared (this is not a solvable problem)
Help me out - how can policing possibly work if no one is legally required to be policed? You just end up with murderers, rapists etc. expressing their right to "resist" with arms like in spaghetti westerns. It is totally symbolic, and would crumble at the first instance of serious government interest of arresting 'troublemakers', which would of course start with a well crafted PR campaign to get the rest of the public on their side. I think it's naive.
1 reply →
A first world military that has remotely piloted drones with IR cameras and other surveillance tools will have no problem crushing any form of resistance. They don’t even need to field any troops, they can remotely kill the rebels. How on earth do you wage a rebellion against such a force?
1 reply →
Weird. In the US there is a right to bear arms, yet people are also pretty helpless against their oppressing government.
Who do you know that's been arrested for posting on social media? I don't know of anyone.
True.
American police will shoot people dead in the streets with impunity, the military industrial complex engages in constant wars regardless of popular sentiment and the American government is currently being carved up by neo-nazis and oligarchs but you can legally be racist on the internet. I guess it truly is the land of the free.
Also... wait six months.
1 reply →