this post was submitted on 17 Jul 2024
660 points (94.4% liked)

politics

19144 readers
3741 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! 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.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] octopus_ink@lemmy.ml 11 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

I'm not even a gun owner buddy, but I'm not going to pretend the world is going to stay safe for everyone who isn't (or can't pretend to be) a white cishet christian if Project 2025 comes to pass.

Edit: They are already ramping it up more, as if that were possible. They want to be ready to hit the ground running on Day 1 of Trump's second term. https://www.advocate.com/politics/marjorie-taylor-greene-rnc

[–] rekorse@lemmy.world 0 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Yeah a ton of people will lose their rights with project 2025, but how does having a gun help you fix that? Are you talking about like civilization declining into groups of people killing each other in the streets?

[–] octopus_ink@lemmy.ml 1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Have you not followed the context of this discussion that led to this seeming disagreement we're now having? Please note, I am not the commenter in the picture below. I was explaining why someone would have this worry. If you think the worry is invalid or overblown, OK, I don't feel the need to argue with you about it.

[–] rekorse@lemmy.world 0 points 4 months ago (1 children)

I'm saying I dont see how guns will help you there either unless you plan to form your own militia I suppose.

Besides this is all based on unfounded fears, which I prefer not to base my decisions on. Seat belts make sense. Most examples of gun ownership do not.

While owning a gun might make someone feel safer, it absolutely increases the danger for those living in and around the house. I'm sure some situations mitigate that problem, and we could likely license those people to have guns.

Suburban family of four does not need a rifle and handgun for each family member. Its far more likely to hurt someone in the family than to be used in a defensive manner. Besides the fact that guns are stolen ALL THE TIME and then used in violent crimes.

The way we treat guns does not respect the power they provide and the multitude of uses they have, good or bad. People also have some false belief that making guns harder to get and more expensive would only affect legal owners. When a gun on the street goes for 300$ now its far easier to buy than if that same gun was worth 1000$ or 10000$, and contrary to popular belief people with severe mental disorders are not the target customer for a street dealer selling a gun.

[–] octopus_ink@lemmy.ml 1 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

If you want an argument about gun ownership you are talking to the wrong guy.

As to the rest - you can read the writing on the wall about what happens in the next Trump presidency or you can ignore it. I can't blame someone for wanting a better chance at self defense under those conditions though.