Weird thing is this is the “government takeover” the 2nd amendment nuts have been screaming about for generations. Not at all surprised that they’re mostly silent now. Also not at all surprised it their own political party who’s doing this.
Weird thing is this is the “government takeover” the 2nd amendment nuts have been screaming about for generations.
No no no. You're thinking of the Civil Rights Act. That's what they were complaining about.
These people have been led around by the nose their whole lives. The same people who have been shouting this nonsense at the 2nd losers are the ones who were inevitably going to pull this.
The fascist will say anything, regardless of reality, logic, or even internal consistency, to advance his self interested power grab and all of the violence it requires. He has no moral code and no allegiance to law. He cannot be reasoned with doesn’t deserve that kind of deference. Once he achieves control, he cannot be voted out of power.
Wielding postmodernism as a weapon; the only truth to them is their truth. Fucking psychopaths.
... which is why they love religion so much
Objective provable reality is secondary to "Belief" ... "Faith" ... "I feel it"
There was a lot more than just the 2nd amendment right that was being violated there.
Something, something, inalienable rights, something, something, life, liberty...
This guy certainly is embracing the nazi lifestyle, he ever gonna face consequences?
Quite a number of Nazis escaped prosecution. They had to be tracked down over half a century, and still a lot escaped entirely.
Quite a few German Nazis were employed by the US Government after the war:
Operation Paperclip generally targeted people with an IQ above room temperature. No one in this administration would qualify.
We'll have to try harder this time I guess
His own personal Tyler is out there, I suspect.
Land of the free... because of the brave
At this point I think it's pretty safe to conclude that when the right-wing 2A guys argue that 2A is inviolable/shall not be infringed, they mean it only in the context of service to right-wing politics, not that it's a right that applies to anyone else. In other words, they support the notion of privilege, not rights.
My dad has always said it'd be the Republicans who would take guns.
They're working for it.
California's gun-control culture started with a 1967 law (Mulford Act) designed to outlaw carrying loaded guns. It was specifically written to keep the Black Panthers from patroling their neighborhoods with loaded firearms.
It was signed into law by Ronald Reagan.
I was actually surprised to see a lot of comments on r/conservative talking about how the stuff the feds are saying about the second amendment is wrong and unconstitutional, and a good number saying that the killing wasn't necessary, they'll ultimately support Trump and ICE over any kind of progressive though but it was interesting. Even the NRA posted about how Pretti was a legal gun owner and there should be an investigation before people jump to conclusions.
This. Don't fall into the team based bullshit, this level of jackbootery should piss off everyone. If not for the red/blue bullshit I am sure that the vast majority of americans would rally together to counter the government overreach but instead everyone is doing the Two Minutes Hate.
When the order to seize the guns comes, it will come from the right, and not the left. Those with money can have guns, those without, can't, no matter what party they belong to.
“When Fascism came into power, most people were unprepared, both theoretically and practically. They were unable to believe that man could exhibit such propensities for evil, such lust for power, such disregard for the rights of the weak, or such yearning for submission. Only a few had been aware of the rumbling of the volcano preceding the outbreak.”
– Erich Fromm, Escape from Freedom
We STILL haven't even seen the worst of it. People consistently lacked the willingness to recognize that it could happen here, even when the threat was imminent. They don't want to think unhappy thoughts, don't want to think their world is crumbling, don't want to acknowledge that things will never go back to how they were. It's incredibly frustrating how much people delude themselves so they don't need to stare into the void.
There were people in 2024 saying that the shit happening at this very moment would never happen under Trump 2.0.
These abhorrent acts have been so normalized over the last year that the unthinkable has become blase.
I shudder to think of where we are going to be in another year.
I didn't realize constitutionally-enshrined rights were something a single appointed official could wave away simply by saying they "don't count."
And even if the victim had broken a law (say, if he didn't have a permit (which he did)), then the legal recourse isn't a summary execution. He was disarmed, he was no longer a threat, and even if he had been carrying illegally (which he wasn't), the law says that he be arrested and granted due process in a court of law.
These federal agents violated due process and the rule of law, and the victim didn't even break any laws.
ICE agents carry weapons and citizens fear for their lives... so by their standards....
I mean, it's Charlie Kirk, but still, what a stupid thing to put in the Constitution if it's for that reason. What about a plebiscite to kick out some rogue government? Nah, let's give guns to the people so they can make a Civil War whenever they feel like it.
Well, discounting the fact that it probably did also serve as means self-defense in an era and place where any form or central peacekeeping force would have logistical difficulties coming to anyone's rescue in a timely manner:
Way back when the colonies had newly and violently won their independence, the idea of just voting a corrupt government out of power would have been laughable to them: What if that government prevents that vote from taking place at all? Why would it respect what a bunch of unarmed civilians have to say? How would those civilians stand up to the might of a professional army under control of that government?
Because of those concerns, they greatly reduced the size of the army after the war was over, so no central government could wield such power again. Instead, citizen militias were formed that, if necessary for defense, would convene and fight together, but couldn't individually take over the country. Thus, there needed to be a constitutional right for those militias to arm themselves. Essentially, it was a way to decentralise military power.
It should also be noted that "arms" back then will not have been the automatic guns we have today. A single gunman wouldn't have done as much damage in the same time as modern-day shooters can. As so many other laws, it's something made ages ago and never adapted to the changing times.
(But also, I'm not really sure how you'd hold such a plebiscite today either. Even if there was some law to formalise it, I imagine it would face the exact same issue: being suppressed by said corrupt government.)
"Rights aren't rights if they can be taken away. They're privileges. That's all we've ever had in this country: A bill of temporary privileges. And if you read the news, even badly you know that the list gets shorter and shorter" - George Carlin
The NRA and right wing gun culture has convinced a generation that the 2A is about your right to own a gun.
The 2A is explicitly about your right to organize members of your community in order to defend your community, the fact that you need weapons for that means that you must also have the right to own weapons.
It also explicitly says “right of the people to keep and bear Arms”. Not sure what point you’re trying to make.
Cool. Do I get to decide which rights apply to Bovino and his bullshit army now? What he's doing doesn't sound much like "...support[ing] and defend[ing] the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic..." or "...bear[ing] true faith and allegiance to the same..." so his actions ought to have consequences too.
Before the reply: No, I will not elaborate, fed.
I am a lifelong supporter of the 2nd Amendment, but not a single issue voter. So no one can really place me politically.
What bothers me most is fellow gun enthusiasts (cough republican gun nuts)... always say its a "God given right".....
these events are going to be a brain melting contraction to their beliefs that the GOP supports them and that the 2A is immutable.
The GOP did a great job of convincing the feeble minded that they are their supporters and guns are their greatest political topic to rally behind... Now trump is having a come to jesus moment for the party, as his DHS, FBI, and others in his administration are saying they will kill you if you have guns around them
The idea of "god given rights" has never been true. Humans have always had to fight for every right they have ever had, and it takes away power from those rights to insinuate they were given to us by some magic sky man.
You fucking Nazis are not granting us our rights....you work for us fuck head
Man, I wonder if the second amendment set is finally realizing the right has always wanted your guns more than the left.
Or did we forget "take the guns first"?
2A nuts are showing themselves as the hypocrites the rest of us already knew they were.
Actually... Bovino is sending out a dog whistle to the real 2A nuts
Bovino gonna get hisself Kirk'ed
In that case, nazi fucks also have no rights.
Remember what happend to Charlie Kirk
The right had him killed hoping that would be the catalyst.
rights are a convenient fiction from the enlightenment era, when the Europeans were trying to atomize and analyze freedom.
you're free to carry a weapon.
Does the word "martinet" have any meaning to anyone here?
Rights are never forfeited, they are violated.
If these officers "feared for their lives" in this situation, maybe we need some agents who aren't fucking cowards. I didn't realize MAGA knowingly celebrated cowardly men.
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News