• @Fal
    link
    fedilink
    English
    -23 months ago

    If you can argue that it’s never a concern that the government will illegally exceed its constitutional authority and threaten the country’s status as a free state, maybe. Good luck with that.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      23 months ago

      Answer the question. Is “exceeding its authority” the justification, in the first half of that sentence?

      • @Fal
        link
        fedilink
        English
        -13 months ago

        Ensuring a free state is the why, citizens owning guns is how

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          13 months ago

          ‘We need X to do Y, therefore Z’ makes X the how.

          We objectively do not do X anymore. Not in any way that requires Z.

          • @Fal
            link
            fedilink
            English
            -1
            edit-2
            3 months ago

            If you want MAGAs in government and law enforcement to be the only ones with guns then that’s your decision. The 2nd amendment makes sure everyone else doesn’t have to do that.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              23 months ago

              ‘American gun culture prevents American fascism’ is not what happened so far. They have a relationship. That’s not it.

              And again: the amendment justifies guns guns guns with a militia that no longer exists. It’s one sentence that does not say what you want.

              • @Fal
                link
                fedilink
                English
                03 months ago

                with a militia that no longer exists.

                So you’re wrong here. But even if you weren’t, nowhere in the amendment does it say belonging to a militia is a requirement

                ‘American gun culture prevents American fascism’ is not what happened so far. They have a relationship. That’s not it.

                So passing gun control because the black panthers were arming themselves for protection against fascists is a success story for you?

                • @[email protected]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  23 months ago

                  It literally says it’s for a militia. And that militia was replaced by the US Army.

                  The second amendment is about the state being able to raise an armed posse to defend the state.

                  So passing gun control because the black panthers were arming themselves for protection against fascists is a success story for you?

                  You lead a rich inner life.

                  I am the one pointing out, gun-nut culture doesn’t give a fuck about stopping fascism. Gun-nut culture doesn’t even care about a right to guns, if it’s the targets of fascism who have the guns. Since before I was born, American gun culture has been nigh-inseparable from the fascists you think it’ll stop.

                  • @Fal
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    -13 months ago

                    It literally says it’s for a militia.

                    It literally does not say anything about requiring membership in a militia. Otherwise it would say the right of a militia to keep and bear arms, not the people.

                    You lead a rich inner life.

                    So just totally ignorant of the history of gun control then?

                    I am the one pointing out, gun-nut culture doesn’t give a fuck about stopping fascism.

                    Good thing those aren’t the only people who are allowed to own guns then right?