This thread is permanently archived
Guns are essential to keeping the elite in check.
| how? what are we supposed to do? shoot them?
| both marx and the american founding fathers had this idea.
with weapons in the populations no government can get too authoritative and abusive.
| Qanon ate my post. Will try again.
While guns do allow for some ability to resist oppression through direct action, they also frequently get used on undeserving targets.
Also if it really came down to it, drone strikes and cell tracking make it pretty easy to make sure you don't become an ACTUAL threat to the oligarchy.
Hackers seem to have a better way to effect change, albeit with a higher learning curve. They control information, and knowledge is power. Thoughts?
| >>241329
Guns can protect from drones and not carrying your cell phone protects against cell tracking.
>undeserving targets
This is the price we pay for liberty. I'd rather watch a whole mall get slaughtered than see gun rights infringed.
| >>241374 good luck shooting a miniature plane out of the sky, Mr. Noscope. Cell phone thing is definitely accurate though.
Also same. I just wish people would be more responsible with their gun ownership, and that it wasn't so stupidly easy for everyone to get and subsequently abuse them. It doesn't help that a lot of gun laws get passed by people who get their info from TV.
| I could smell this bait from over in /cyb/.
| >>241269
The thing is, that neither the american founding fathers nor marx expected masses beeing so stupid, that they prefer to shoot at their class comrades over their class enemys again and again. For the 1st world countries, class conflict is already won by the capitalists, as there is no class consiousnes and no international solidarity in the proletariat present, just dividing chauvinist lies.
In rising 3rd world countrys things look diffrent but not really better.
| >>241329
Literally no one would use drone strikes against their own citizens, on their own land. Authoritarian government don't go blasting their own cities with tanks, planes, missiles, and all that kind of stuff.
| >>241489
>good luck shooting a miniature plane out of the sky, Mr. Noscope
What is birdshot? Also anti-drone defenses are an emerging technology. I'm not afraid of them right now.
>>241621
| You guys realize guns are little more than loud toys compared to modern remote weaponry, right?
| >>241934 pretty much this.
Small scale conflicts will boil down to who has a gun, sure, but police have drones, SWAT teams, sharpshooters... Domestic terrorism has become so rampant that cops can easily justify overkill armaments. If you rely on your gun access, you will be severely outclassed because guns often can't pierce through heavily armored cars.
Tldr if you want to start an insurgency, you need a weapon that isn't already being countered.
| >>241966 >>ebbf0a pretty much covered it, but traditional firearms simply aren't useful compared to things like remote drone strikes, especially with current surveilance methods.
Frankly, the the elite doesn't give two shits about gun rights except in how it's making them money.
| >>241991
Yeah because the US military has done so well in the middle east right? The same middle east that is basically a bunch of goat fuckers with soviet-era guns filled with sand? You don't need to pierce tank armour because tanks aren't used to counter guerrilla tactics. The surveillance issues are easily countered if you ever start to care enough to stop using the products that spy on you.
| Yeah it's not the 18th century anymore where the tech is somewhat level. If this was a real cyb destopia you'd be rekted.
Government is already bumming you and your guns can't do nuthin.
| >>242735
Funny how there seems to be so much inorganic support for abolishing gun rights despite them being "useless". Really gets your noggin joggin'
| >>0e3d0f Don't really give a shit tbh. You guys can shoot eachother as much as you like.
It's just weird to see people pretend that gun enthusiasts can do anything against the largest military spender.
Just smells of gun wanking.
| >>242878
If you are stupid enough to believe the anti-gun propaganda that would have you thinking the military is going to do shit against any significant portion of the US citizenry going insurgent...
| What's the funniest to me is - who are you going to shoot to take down the Big Bad Government? Police forces are agents of it, but no individual is responsible. Are you going to kill every last member of the forces in power if they "overstep their bounds"? Do you REALLY think your shitty auto-modded rifle is going to be your savior?
Fact is the American government is immensely powerful and the second you "rebel" you'll be labeled as a terrorist group and taken care of succinctly.
| Plus, guns can't win you an election by force - but hackers can. At best, you can use guns to appeal to a demographic.
| >>241709
Then, after they would win, they would rule over a Great Land of Rubble and Corpses.
Plus, real life is not an RTS, soldiers won't just happily go on a full scale war against their own countrymen.
| >>243445
>Plus, guns can't win you an election by force
Sorry, wat? What is Russia, China, North Korea etc?
>>244205
When they have spent decades making us all hate each other, yes they will. They did once before.
| I prefer having a strong law instead of the law of the strongest. I don't want to have every asshole owning a gun and I don't wanna have to carry a gun myself everywhere to feel save. This sounds just like dystopia to me.
If I had the right to carry a gun, I would probably shoot down pro gun activists and racists. So it's better for them not to have this right.
This is why there is an estate monopoly of power ideally in a democratic and social estate with separation of power.
| >>246059
So mentally ill people like yourself are usually prohibited from gun ownership for the very reason you mentioned. Just because you are an irresponsible infant doesn't mean the rest of us are.
| >>246495
Wasn't it your president that cancelled gun prohibition for "mentally ill" people?
In the end it's mostly the pro weapon idiots that are mentally ill. They are that much ill that they can't even know what sanity is. The best way to therapize them is by let them eat their own shit (metaphorical). So as long weapons are accessible so easily, make them afraid of getting shot every moment. They have to expirience how it feels to live in their stupid dystopian madhouse.
| >>246588
I think you are confusing me for an American. My country does not allow guns, but that doesn't stop the criminals.
| >>246664 Stop it does not. But make it more difficult to be found and provide ground to follow them if you have clues and arrest them for ownership alone, it does.
| >>246664
I think Trump is more president for racist, nationalist, chauvinist assholes all over the world than for Americans.
Also gun prohibition stop criminals before they can harm anyone, as the preparation for it (getting guns) is already a criminal act.
| Only if you use them
| >>246588
The Obama rule wasn't in effect at all. It just gave another database for guns store owners to look at when running the background check. That database would have been small though, as it only effected ppl that had such bad disabilities, they couldn't take care of themselves. Slso selling guns to the mentally ill is banned in most states.
| Is it? If that was the case that noone should be allowed to use guns there already
| Colorado, indiana, and new Hampshire don't have laws for that
| They either snapped, got them from their parents, work, or had them from others acociated with them.
| Also the 2nd amendment will be used to death and I in all actuality am cool with "The Right to Bear Arms">>f08c21
This thread is permanently archived
|