(As a general concept of how a society should run, not intended as a US-specific question.)

I sometimes see people on the internet saying that giving people easy access to guns is too risky and there should be stricter gun control, while simultaneously wanting to abolish the police? I’m just confused on what people really want?

You cant both abolish the police and then also disarm the citizens, gotta pick one. So which is it, internet? Self-policing with guns? Or reform the police?

[Please state what country you’re in]

---

(Also its funny how the far-right of the US is both pro-gun and pro-police, I’m confused by that as well)

  • OBJECTION!@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    23 hours ago

    US

    My side should have guns, the other side shouldn’t. I don’t think it’s possible to generalize a principle beyond that, because policy should be adapted to specific conditions.

    Currently, the right has tons of guns and the left doesn’t. Try to confiscate the right’s guns and you’ll probably have a civil war on your hands. So either add restrictions for new purchases, which locks in the current situation of only the right being armed, or don’t, and leave open the possibility of the left getting armed. So, better to have easy access to guns.

    • Semester3383@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      17 hours ago

      I think that the left should absofuckinglylutely be getting strapped.

      The good news is that leftists have been strapped for years. The bad news is that, 1) they’re mostly using Mosin-Nagants and Makarovs because they’re red fudds, and 2) most people that are politically left of center are not leftists. (I’m a leftist; I do have a Mosin-Nagant, but it was a gift, and I hate shooting it. I prefer my AR-15 and AR-10.)

    • AA5B@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      18 hours ago

      Before the current political climate I would have said it should be a lot harder to get a weapon (except maybe a long gun), and we need to reduce the quantity at least three orders of magnitude (thousandth).

      But the current political climate really makes it a stark choice. My visceral reaction is that with the gestapo kidnapping people off the street and sending them to remote gulags, the suspension of due process and constitutional rights, political leadership holding themselves above the law …. We really need guns. All of them. For everyone, to defend against tyrants as the gpframers f the constitution intended

      Then I came to my senses. My more considered reaction is the anger, divisiveness, bigotry, and general craziness accepted out in the open, is just going to lead to untold deaths, feuds, more spite and anger, more lawlessness. We need to send Sherman through the south, confiscating all firearms

      • Semester3383@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        17 hours ago

        Then I came to my senses.

        Except you didn’t. You rationalized, and thought that someone else would save you, instead of you and the people you care about saving yourself. The floodwaters are rising, and you’re on the roof; you either have to get your own ass to safety, or drown, because FEMA’s been defunded, and no one is coming.

    • iamdefinitelyoverthirteen@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      22 hours ago

      I’m trying to get as many of my lefty friends to buy guns as I can. I’ve offered to help them buy a gun that’s good for them and to teach them how to safely handle, store, use, and just generally be around a firearm.