497
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 12 Apr 2026
497 points (100.0% liked)
Showerthoughts
41657 readers
739 users here now
A "Showerthought" is a simple term used to describe the thoughts that pop into your head while you're doing everyday things like taking a shower, driving, or just daydreaming. The most popular seem to be lighthearted clever little truths, hidden in daily life.
Here are some examples to inspire your own showerthoughts:
- Both “200” and “160” are 2 minutes in microwave math
- When you’re a kid, you don’t realize you’re also watching your mom and dad grow up.
- More dreams have been destroyed by alarm clocks than anything else
Rules
- All posts must be showerthoughts
- The entire showerthought must be in the title
- No politics
- If your topic is in a grey area, please phrase it to emphasize the fascinating aspects, not the dramatic aspects. You can do this by avoiding overly politicized terms such as "capitalism" and "communism". If you must make comparisons, you can say something is different without saying something is better/worse.
- A good place for politics is c/politicaldiscussion
- Posts must be original/unique
- Adhere to Lemmy's Code of Conduct and the TOS
If you made it this far, showerthoughts is accepting new mods. This community is generally tame so its not a lot of work, but having a few more mods would help reports get addressed a little sooner.
Whats it like to be a mod? Reports just show up as messages in your Lemmy inbox, and if a different mod has already addressed the report, the message goes away and you never worry about it.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Weapons don't know and don't care what you do with them. A trigger pull while hunting is no different from the same trigger pull during a revolution. A strike of a knife while cutting cabbage is the same as a strike while chopping up your local equivalent of a secret policeman.
One could argue a hammer is meant to facilitate acts of rebellion but in reality it doesn't know jack shit what it's meant for, it's just happy to be there.
Also it's legal to own weapons/illegal to advocate for violent overthrow in many, many countries. It's the intentions that matter.
I think what OP is referring to is that many supporters of “gun rights” like to use the argument that the second amendment is key to the freedom of America because an armed populace cannot be controlled by an authoritarian government. I don’t particularly care for that argument, but if you run with it, it would make sense that the right of the populace to organize armed rebellion is just as important as their right to own and carry weapons.
I wonder what would happen if the second amendment was about proper organization of that "militia" instead. It's often the deciding factor between success and failure when it comes to rebellion, even when you're outgunned.
90% of the difference between a hunting rifle and a sniper rifle is what you point it at.
That and tens of thousands of $ needed to make it perform well in modern war. It's wild how much combat sniper scopes sell for, let alone some of the ammo needed in significant quantities.
You sound like someone with a lot of guns and experience with them.
No, I can't even own a rifled gun yet, just subbed to some units and like checking out their gear.
And yet you state your opinion with such confidence. Wild.
My opinion? Checking how much something costs is free and is a fact
edit: some examples for you, Archer TSA-7 is $15k, SAFRAN JIM LR is $20-30k used. Mk211 is $100 a pop, but even if we're talking about hunting-adjacent rounds high quality 338 and 308 are still expensive
Son, I'm 50 with a case full of reach out and touch someone, and I casually ring steel at 200 yards with a model 80 in 308 (which is a favorite sniper round by the way) with a couple hundred bucks of redfield scope. 20 rounds is $30.
Just because you can find expensive toys doesn't mean that is what it takes to do the job.
Don't believe the hype.
Modern snipers don't have the luxury of being 200 yards away from their target (or the luxury of daytime). Get with the times. Also don't son me, thanks.
Request denied, junior. You walked into a discussion on citizen action talking from the side of your inexperienced neck about how only the most modern, bespoke equipment can hold up to the rigors of war, and son, you are full of shit.
Civil wars are fought with hunting rifles and anything else that hands can be laid upon. You sound like the kind that would sign up on the government's side anyway.
The original comment was talking about how 90% of the difference between a hunting rifle and a sniping rifle is what you point it at. Which is partially correct, except for the fact that actual sniper units fighting in wars need a shitload more equipment.
Notice how none of us brought civil wars into the discussion until you came along.
Either way I'd love to see you fight a BMP with your 30 dollar ammo at night, civil war or not.
e: Also hell yeah I'd sign on the government's side, I want my country to exist, thank you very much. We don't have batshit insane politics like americans do, just a batshit insane neighbor trying to wipe us off the map.
Dude, Amen!! Some of my friends might dry heave at some of the purchases I've made and the amount I've spent 😅. Yet I'm a drop in the bucket compared to others!
Difference is most countries are aimed at self-defence... as in against home invaders and such...
The US 2nd amendment seems to be intended for "protection against a tyrannical government"...
That's just collective self defense, though.
Since they (founding fathers) just protected against a tyrannical government, I'm pretty sure they wanted firearms to be fully legal to own in the future to be able to "easily" do the same thing they just did. I just don't think they realized how good the tyranny would get at propaganda and misdirection! They knew and had seen this before, they understood the reason behind it. A well regulated militia- at least to me- meant the organization of people to take a stand against the government (bc at the time there were no military branches). Therefore if the corrupted politicians of the time tried to arrest or stop from being overthrown, the people's militia could work to replace the gov with new individuals!
I honestly think, looking back, the formation of the military (or at least 1 reason) was to protect the gov from its people, but the excuse that it's for foreign threats was used. Outside of a few smaller attacks and WWs, nobody has really "attacked" America in nearly 250 years. Everything else has been self initiated or inflicted; and, personally, I sort of feel the gov keeps all those willing to "fight" tied up in the military, keeping busy fighting other wars so there really is no chance of a domestic uprise.... Obviously all speculation and just presumptions based on actions... I'm no expert!
Edit: at least the last part feels that way. Things are getting really bad at home, so what do we do? Start the first draft in roughly 50 years! Again, not an expert...
I can't speak for every country but that's not the case here. As long as you aren't breaking laws nobody cares if it's meant for defending against home invaders or collecting dust in a collector's storage.
If I kick a man to near death do I get charged with assault with deadly weapon for wearing shoes?
Shoes and hammers/knives/other heavy blunt (or not) objects are kinda different, also I don't know your local laws, so maybe you will?