Why are liberals so wrong about gun control?

Why are liberals so wrong about gun control?

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waco_siege
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

Too much emotion. They think the "if guns are illegal, only criminals will have guns" argument is actually not true.

deliberatly trying to disarm the parts of the population most likely to rise up.

useful idiots of the state

They want to treat symptoms, not the disease.

That.

Lack of any coherent political theory, so garbage in, garbage out.

Because emotions.

They're not. Restricting access to guns is the reasonable position to take
It's not like your pistol will be much help against a tank

it is a mystery

No, it won't. But your pistol will be a help against the strikebreakers who come to kneecap you and your fellow workers when push comes to shove, the opposing political militias that will form should the central government collapse, and most other groups that will be a threat to your safety if shit hits the fan.

Protip: The civil rights movement had the Deacons For Defense and Malcom X, the Indian revolution had numerous armed groups that wound up making Gandhi look like the nicest man for the job to the Brits, and the numerous East European communist parties ceded power peacefully out of fear of being taken out and shot, like Ceausescu. No power has ever been shamed into giving up or drastically changing, they have always chosen to do so out of fear of violence.

...

They are easily swayed by emotional events and only offer surface level solutions. In reality most gun deaths are commited with hand guns in poor poc communities, because they are poor and uneducated, to combat this problem one would have to change the structure of America radically, which libs are unwilling to do. So instead they focus on statistically irrelevant tragedies and ban """assault weapons""" cuz muh chillins.

...

This is the sectarian version of "if u hurt a fascist ur literally hitler".

haah waaw

:^)

You don't need to destroy the tank, just be able to put it out of commission or kill the crew.


This is what not reading Marx looks like,

What? Ceaușescu didn't "cede" power let alone peacefully and he was shot after he was captured then court-martialed by rebels.

Read it again, I'm saying the peaceful ceding of power in some of the eastern bloc was likely in fear of ending up the same way.

Lol

Liberals get the bullet too. Too bad it likely won't be in your lifetime or mine.

Modern Western liberalism is entirely based on muh feelings and preserving the status quo.

...

because no guerillas have ever had to go up against tanks in all of history

Because they're liberals. They're wrong about almost everything.

What a weird seeming guy. Do jews control the water supply?

I've laughed immediately before/after funerals before.

Really though wouldn't the US military instantly BTFO any organized resistance movement? Satelites, drones, combat armor, tanks etc. Just feels like you lose instantly by existing in modern america.

They don't like getting shot.

The history of the U.S. at war from the Korean War on points to 'no'

They aren't wrong.
Gun control is the logical conclusion of liberalism.
To be pro gun you'd need to be anti-establishment in some sense.

Yep, unless it's a mass movement with middle class white people in it.
They could probably drone strike Detroit right now with no political ramifications.

Guns in the US have their roots in slavery. White supremacist and fascist sympathizers flock to guns because of this historical legacy which is why the state is cool with so many US citizens having guns since by in large only right wing useful idiots buy them, prove me wrong

I think a lot of well meaning like liberals or even a political lumpenproles associate that ugly reactionary bigotry with gun ownership and want to ban them.

If the left could show how guns could stop or curb their exploitation more people would be against gun control if the left ever did that they'd be crushed by CIA a la the black panthers

This.
Their position clearly makes sense if you have the same outlook at them. Ultimately, this debate about "does gun control actually help" is completely secondary to the primary issue which is a difference of priorities.
Simply put liberals care about saving lives the most, this is natural because they are sheltered from human suffering and think the status quo is perfect, therefore it deaths trigger them the most.
Right and Left both have things they prioritize over that (revolution potential, freedumbs, autonomy, fuck da state etc.), it's as simple as that.

Nonsense. America did poorly in those wars because of homefield advantage. Imagine trying to fight against the US gov that already knows where you and your family live.


en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waco_siege
Whites chimped out plenty of times and got BTFO by the feds. I feel like there's no country with a stronger history of gunning down dissidents than the US.

Liberals: violence is bad
The state: does violence
Liberals: that doesn't count because the state isn't an individual

Well it's not too hard to believe. Until very recently I was anti gun. When you see all these right wing mass shootings and see a bunch of conservatives with semi-automatic weapons you tend to think that disarming the population is a good idea, especially when other neoliberal countries like Australia and UK have had good results with getting rid of guns.

Liberals don't understand the revolutionary aspect of owning a gun. It ties into the whole "peaceful protest" idea.

it is just a continuation of the liberal motto: treat the symptom, not the cause

Jim Crow gun control laws.

It magical to see such lack of historical background when it comes to the early version of gun control laws and the slave trade in Africa. Ignorant of the fact jim Crow laws were made to keep the dynamic of blacks cannot stand equal to a white man and having an armed black person could not stand, as weapon on his hand would made them equal in force. Then don't forget black slaves were a result of conquer tribe by another African warlord.

What dafaq is this word salad. If blacks armed the,selves in mass the US gov would crush them and grab every single one of their guns, and ever single NRA gun nut would cheer the gov on.

Gun ownership is de facto retrictd to reactionary whites in the US.

The 2nd is there so bourgeois can keep the prole and particularly black proles in their place. And you dumbasses wonder why so many poor proles support gun control

Forget to take your meds today, beautiful mind?

Now this is an thought born out of very shelter view on the world, a typical sentiment spout by the same silver spoon type. Again not context or understanding of historical background.

Nice dodge there, care to put it into a counter argument? That guy try, arguing for the bourgeois, on why the black should just lay down and take it instead of standing as equals.