Armed to deter cops : chaoticgood

[-] morrowind@lemmy.ml 205 points 10 months ago

It's a crime in Dallas to help homeless people?

[-] UpperBroccoli 199 points 10 months ago

Yeah, it's what Jesus would want, didn't you know?

[-] SoleInvictus 113 points 10 months ago

Supply-side Jesus is the worst Jesus.

[-] Jessica@discuss.tchncs.de 61 points 10 months ago

For the uninitiated: https://www.beliefnet.com/news/2003/09/the-gospel-of-supply-side-jesus.aspx

[-] Bertuccio@lemmy.world 18 points 10 months ago

That last line is truly icing on the cake.

[-] ProgrammingSocks@pawb.social 170 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

You know you're on the wrong side of history when you make it illegal to give to those most in need.

[-] Snowpix@lemmy.ca 67 points 10 months ago

And have to be visibly armed to stop the cops from harassing you for doing so.

[-] pdxfed@lemmy.world 19 points 10 months ago

And people are banning books.

[-] Routhinator@startrek.website 21 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

And claiming to be a devout Christian while making these laws is ludicrous.

[-] candyman337@sh.itjust.works 137 points 10 months ago

The black panther method, 10 outta 10

[-] RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world 74 points 10 months ago

Yep. This is it.

And that’s a factor in generating early gun control laws, black people exercising their rights.

[-] Freefall@lemmy.world 129 points 10 months ago

As a 2A liberal, I LOVE this. Black Panthers did it right, don't change what works!

[-] chiliedogg@lemmy.world 107 points 10 months ago

Fun fact: California's anti-gun culture was born out of racism and fear of the Black Panthers.

Ronald fucking Reagan started the anti-gun movement to disarm black people

[-] GroundedGator@lemmy.world 18 points 10 months ago

And then continued it federally with bans on assault weapons and magazines over a certain capacity after someone tried to assassinate him.

I say we should bring back the Reagan approach on gun control.

load more comments (1 replies)

load more comments (4 replies)

load more comments (17 replies)

[+] Perhapsjustsniffit@lemmy.ca 118 points 10 months ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

[deleted]

[-] undergroundoverground@lemmy.world 26 points 10 months ago

Its only crazy if you don't want to look at why they're doing it square in the eye. Please don't get me wrong, I wouldn't judge anyone doing it, presuming it does apply a little you yourself. I could be wrong of course. The truth is very, very ugly and not something anyone would want to be true.

Despite their claims, the problem was never the cost to the government of feeding the homeless, as can be seen. The reason the police do this is that wage slaves won't be forced back into the worst, most poorly paid jobs we can find if they're not facing death by starvation.

It was the same in the UK, back when they made feeding the homeless illegal and the penalty being being homeless OR without a job for 3 days was being sent to the workhouse where you might well be worked to death.

Its the same thing, centuries apart.

load more comments (3 replies)

load more comments (1 replies)

[-] wildcardology@lemmy.world 94 points 10 months ago

Damn, giving food and clothes is a crime.

[-] Sendpicsofsandwiches@sh.itjust.works 47 points 10 months ago

It's food serving legislation being taken too far. The clothes I think are fine, but since they're not inspected by the health department like a restaurant the government can technically shut it down which is complete bullshit.

[-] alcoholicorn@lemmy.ml 33 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

No, the Good Samaritan Act says free food doesn't have to be inspected as long as it's given "in good faith apparently wholesome food or apparently fit grocery products to a nonprofit organization for ultimate distribution to needy individuals"

https://www.usda.gov/media/blog/2020/08/13/good-samaritan-act-provides-liability-protection-food-donations

All fifty states and the District of Columbia have additional food donation statues that limit food donor’s liability—these currently vary widely, such as by who (i.e., donors, nonprofit organizations), and what foods and food products are covered.

state laws may provide greater protection against liability, but not less

load more comments (2 replies)

[-] wildcardology@lemmy.world 17 points 10 months ago

So if I buy the food let's say 100 burgers from a fast food joint. That would be ok right?

[-] Sendpicsofsandwiches@sh.itjust.works 25 points 10 months ago

Anecdotally, I don't think so. I used to do some work with a place that did a lot of charity work and would get together bi-weekly to talk about travel and have a banquet. The banquet was always prepared and served in accordance with the law, and there were often tons of leftovers. So we would give the leftovers to the homeless. The health department fined us because we weren't allowed to serve food outside of our establishment.

load more comments (12 replies)

[-] bigFab@lemmy.world 73 points 10 months ago

Now I understand why americans need guns.

[-] caboose2006@lemmy.ca 28 points 10 months ago

Too bad this is an extremely rare use case, but yes this is exactly the INTENT of the second amendment.

load more comments (12 replies)

[-] laughterlaughter@lemmy.world 27 points 10 months ago

I mean, that was always the point.

To fight tyrannical bullshit.

It's just that purist assholes don't want any regulation whatsoever - so that anyone, anyone can get a gun. And welp.... the tragic bullshit happens.

I'm not pro-gun or anti-gun. I'm pro-common-sense.

load more comments (13 replies)

[-] drunkpostdisaster@lemmy.world 19 points 10 months ago

I hate that this is true.

[-] EmpeRohrOn@lemmy.world 66 points 10 months ago

Are you ok over there? Do you need something? Like healthcare and a social state?

[-] Liz@midwest.social 50 points 10 months ago

[-] FlashMobOfOne@lemmy.world 63 points 10 months ago

Every single protest should have an armed contingent in America. That is the only way cops will take you seriously, but make sure you dot the i's and cross the t's, because your permits better be current.

load more comments (4 replies)

[-] PotatoesFall@discuss.tchncs.de 53 points 10 months ago

Does being armed actually deter cops in Texas? In my home country being armed is more likely to alert cops

[-] orcrist@lemm.ee 147 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

Yes, it deters the cops. You have to understand that many or most cops are paranoid, cowards, and bullies. They aren't going around enforcing laws because they think that they need to uphold justice. Rather, they're going around power tripping. And it's not such a great power trip if you have to worry about getting shot because people think that you're dirty.

Of course this is not true for all cops all the time, but it's certainly true for many cops most of the time.

load more comments (10 replies)

[-] VelvetStorm@lemmy.world 114 points 10 months ago

It stopped the cops from entering a school while someone slaughtered 19 kids and 2 adults and that was just 1 person with a gun. So I'd say this would.

[-] mkwt@lemmy.world 64 points 10 months ago

Have you heard about Uvalde?

[-] southsamurai@sh.itjust.works 41 points 10 months ago

And that's how you properly fuck, fuck, fuck the police.

[+] n0clue@lemmy.world 34 points 10 months ago

[deleted]

[-] chaogomu@lemmy.world 24 points 10 months ago

Yes I have. It's called a sword cane. I happen to have some knee damage, and if I play up my limp a bit, no one even looks twice at my cane.

load more comments (5 replies)

load more comments (7 replies)

[-] mashbooq@lemmy.world 26 points 10 months ago

More of this, please

[-] match@pawb.social 23 points 10 months ago

They could skip the middle step and just arm the homeless

[-] oleorun@real.lemmy.fan 18 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

Link to tweet: https://x.com/FordFischer/status/1203485521151959040

load more comments (2 replies)

Chaotic Good