Voting, protesting, and other forms of nonviolent direct action are the only viable strategies, unless the violence you propose isn’t against isolated cops committing injustices but is instead all the way to total violent revolution.
Dude in any scenario where shooting at the police became politically viable I’d take the crates of guns and explosives smuggled in from overseas over your hoarded civilian crap any day.
I would too. But at least we’d have a much better head start than with zero and the police having them all
Your whole world view is completely nonsensical.
It’s not my whole world view. It’s my view on guns and 2A
Even your doomsday scenario we’re still better off banning guns and saving 40k lives a year.
It’s not just my doomsday scenario. People should have a right to immediately stand up to tyranny such as the video I posted above even if it costs them their life
If the expectation is that it will cost them their life, then they don’t have the right. And even if you do expect people to violently confront cops committing violent offenses to their likely immediate deaths, they don’t need weapons to do that.
Your proposed system of justice is nothing but vigilantism and anarchy. If you expect people to be able to routinely get away with murdering cops based on their own split-second assessments of the situation, there is no reason to have a police force at all, when instead it can just be handled by roving vigilantes meting out death as they see fit.
It’s a long thread, but this whole thing started by my simply stating that the issue of ever increasing tyrannical militarized police forces aren’t talked about enough, if at all. I think it should be discussed alongside common sense gun reform. That led to my being told this simply isn’t viable or important enough right now and would take at 10 years to implement. I also stated that I’d be fine with peaceful mass protests, but I’m not giving up my guns until the issue is resolved. I was then called a libertarian and a troll before I was forced into defending my position through providing the logical extension of worst case scenarios
And again a violent revolution is going to be fought with military equipment supplied from overseas. You might have a few ar-15’s. I’ll wait for the pallets of AK’s, C-4, and ‘how to IUD’ instruction manuals. Those will show up within a few weeks of the initiation of hostility.
Modern guerillas spring up anywhere a certain % of the population is ready to do something extreme. It’s like vaccination rates or something. It’s the barrier no government can cross.
North Korea interestingly has evaded this by cleverly using brutal repression and a huge network of informants to fracture the population into small worlds that do not communicate with one another. This is designed to prevent any organized resistance and it works quite well. It’s important to recognize that this was only possible because of the help of a sponsor country with an identical ideology that was MUCH larger than they were. Without China they never could have acquired the initial level of control required to implement when they have today. It’s also why the NK regime is so afraid of any liberalization because it makes those individual bubbles just a little bit bigger, and the more of them overlap the more risk they have.
There is no force on earth that could do the US what the Kim family has pulled off in NK. It’s too large, too rich, and it’s population too uncooperative. Because of that we don’t have to worry so much about the need to rebel against tyranny that is makes any sense to lose 40k people a year to gun violence.
Also you know very well that police demilitarization is much more likely to happen when the police no longer operate in a place with more guns than people. It’s very hard to expect the typical cop to be cool with a scenario where they could potentially be outgunned by a criminal. It’s just not OK in their heads, and we have to deal with that… The best way to de-escalate that is to take the gun count down and remove their primary justification for having that type of equipment.
Just putting this here for the idiots who wanna argue guns stop bad guys
This isn’t my proposed system of justice. I would much prefer cops be held accountable by the establishment. But since that doesn’t appear to be in the offing any time soon, it is my reason for not wanting to give up 2A rights
Also, Cactus’ wHaT aBoUt ThE PoLiCe is a pretty stupid argument. Half the reason police are so fucking aggressive in this country is because of guns.
1 Like
Interesting take and great overall post, but question…
I don’t see police wanting to take guns away. If anything, most are very strong advocates for 2A. If true, I don’t see how your above assumption is correct
Bullshit
-
Gun buybacks work.
-
They are going to need something to chase when the war on drugs ends at some point in the next few years. Seriously we’re like 1.5-6 years away from there not being any drug arrests to make at all basically. Do you know what % of police jobs are related to drug enforcement? It’s insane. Those guys are not going to be picky about what statutes they enforce to try to stay in business. Guns will without a doubt be the thing they latch onto the hardest.
- Nobody is going to take away everyone’s guns. That’s not remotely viable politically. This is just registering your gun and being responsible for it if used in a crime. It’s the end of the pipeline of firearms to the underworld through straw purchases, and it’s a significant safety upgrade for cops. Assault weapons will also be banned, and given their massive usage in mass shootings since the ban expired last time I say good riddance.
Um #2 is wildly optimistic lol. This murica you’re talking about. And anyways I think cops with nothing to do is not exactly a huge problem…
I’ve been for legalizing all drugs forever. I also believe drug addiction is a health issue not a crime. It will also put many gangs and cartels out of business. But the thought of police having nothing better to do than coming after our guns is a scary thought. Just noticed you amended your post with a 3. Ok fair enough. But I don’t see why you won’t admit that with less drugs, illegal guns, and gangs to worry about then police won’t need assault rifles either or be equipped like they’re heading into a war zone. I mean, I can make the same argument back at you. In the old days cops were armed with nothing but a revolver and a nightstick, while Capone had sub machine guns and they seemed to do just fine (unless that was just in the movies lol).
There’s a huge tendency with people to think that the future will be just like the past… Even though their own personal experience suggests that this is not accurate. The War on Drugs is a almost 50 year old trend that is now killing more people every year than died in Vietnam. It’s in the final dystopian stages of burning out and won’t survive the next presidential term. High level trafficking may get you in trouble still, but if we look at the numbers the War on Drugs was never about high level traffickers, and usually when we did break up the leadership of drug trafficking organizations we just got a lot of people killed.
Prohibition was in full swing and beer wasn’t even legal at the end of 1929. It was completely 100% over in less than three years.
1 Like
Yes. 100%. I didnt see it til you said this.
1 Like
I don’t understand - we would have to a) get one of a handful of dems to be the candidate b) win and c) most likely win the senate to have even a chance of the war on drugs effectively ending i.e. countrywide decriminalization of cannabis and then what do you do about stuff like meth? I’m not really getting it.
https://twitter.com/joshuawongcf/status/1160123743701590016?s=19
This is reality, not some fantasy about mowing down “corrupt” officials with guns.
It isn’t bullshit. You’re just stuck on your ancap/Kokesh Rambo days if I’m correct and you’re Lirva.
Cops here have to face the threat of getting their asses shot where elsewhere in Western cultures the probability of it is way lower. Notice I didn’t say that was the only reason why they’re aggressive. Of course there’s other variables, but at the end of the day that argument made isn’t a very good one.
My guess is it will look a lot like Portugal for the harder drugs. Cannabis will just be legal recreationally ofc.