Republicans are a much larger threat to the first amendment. If you go far left enough, you get to pro guns again.

16

Notably, Republicans are the #1 force right now eroding Americans’ rights under both the 1st and 2nd Amendments.

13

Comment Deleted

0

Trump: “I am going to disarm entire minority groups and have them barred from gun ownership.” This fuckin idiot: “Trump’s track record on the 1A is wayyy better than those democrats”

9

Comment Deleted

0

Anonymous #2 7w

Republicans already live here wym

9

Yeah that was a typo on my part the coffee hasn’t really hit yet And it’s different because it’s in addition to the same kinds of attacks, not instead of them. That’s a substantively worse track record.

1

Comment Deleted

0

Comment Deleted

0

Dude literally no one is taking away your first and second amendment rights

1

Comment Deleted

0

How

5

Anonymous #6 7w

On the left specifically

4

I’m confused what you mean by an area with majority Black population having less meaningful rights to firearms… Like open carry? CPL classes? Firing ranges? What exactly do you mean by that… more police presence scrutinizing every Black man with a backpack to check for weapons? bc that’s just typical Republican “tough on crime” policy infringing upon their 2nd and 4th amendment rights, per usual.

6

Anonymous #6 7w

Trump wants anyone who doesn't love isreal (mostly leftists) put on a list 😳, which ironically is the same reason 2A ppl argued to not have a gun registry. That reason is any government listing ppl in groups usually eventually gets to eradicating that list, or everyone not on the list

7

Comment Deleted

0

Oh and I believe he wants a trans list

1

Comment Deleted

0

Ya bro I'm straight up not talking to you. You said "🤓 erm that's actually not a 2a problem". And you are CORRECT! Because I'm not replying to what you said. If you look up there it says #8-#1. I'm providing an example of 1A getting taken away since you provided the 2A example since #1 said "no one is taking away 1a or 2a"

1

Anonymous #8 7w

#6 ig but whatever you're prolly still gonna respond

1

Comment Deleted

0

I’ve been to many majority Black areas and they generally seem to have decent access to CPL classes and have open carry laws… I just checked Kalamazoo and Detroit, both which have CPL classes and some which even provide a pistol and ammo for free at the classes. Memphis is permitless open carry as well as online CPL training in TN (which is insane to me). I think you’re thinking of the constant police scrutiny that Black people get subjected to for unlawful stop & frisk searches for weapons…

1

Comment Deleted

0

Anonymous #3 7w

philanthropy isnt bad like giving money to israel and such, especially when it isnt really comparable to the rest of the money we put towards other things

5

Well I looked into the two precursory factors, but somehow we walked away with different results. That’s how discourse works though. Where are you getting that information from? Looking into Kalamazoo specifically, (and the entire state of Michigan) you are legally eligible to open carry a firearm that is registered to you.

1

Comment Deleted

0

There has been laws against concealed weapons in the United Stares since the 1800s so… concealed weapons laws are as old as the wild west.

1

Anonymous #9 7w

Just want to make sure the logic is as follows: Money to foreign governments I don’t like -> Wasted tax dollars that could’ve gone to health care 😡 Money to foreign governments I like -> Philanthropyyyyy 😁

-1

Comment Deleted

0

Yeah, like I said a few times — they’re hyperpoliced and get their 2A rights violated all the time in this Republican police state that thinks every Black man with a gun is a criminal and fatally dangerous. That’s how Philando Castile was murdered, just a gun owner in the car with his family. Same with Ryan Whittaker, just a gun owner answering a VERY loud unidentified knocking at his door in the night. Yet police “do no wrong” when they kill lawful gun owners for lawfully carrying firearms.

1

Comment Deleted

0

Yes the people lobbying for me to have guns want me to be scared of other people with guns so that I buy more guns and ultimately ammunition for those guns and give them more money for them to put into PACs for lobbying Republican politicians hmm… also Ryan Whittaker was a white man in a majority white area of Phoenix. It’s an extremely high percentage of unjustified and reckless police killings & shootings happen to Black Americans, usually men or children, which is why we talk about it more.

1

Comment Deleted

0

I want to be certain that every single person who carries a firearm is a responsible and capable individual who is educated and trained on weapons handling, safety, and first aid in an emergency that requires the use of their firearm. Like I told those men: if you are at a playground with a gun holstered, I want to be CERTAIN that you’re competent to defend against a threat while also rapidly analyze the scene for safety to avoid collateral IF a discharge is deemed necessary.

1

Comment Deleted

0

Are you suggesting that it’s okay that people can walk into a gun store, buy a hi point with ammo, stow it in their car, and then *forget about it FOR YEARS*? 😐 Shouldn’t people have to be informed and educated on gun safety with stowage, aiming, cleaning, PPE, and whatnot? Like if 2A is to protect us against our own or ANY military then we don’t know fucking shit about firearms or weapons in comparison to them lmao

1

Wouldn’t you want that guy with the gun on the playground to have those skills though? It’s not impossible to embed that within the background check system for a one-time competency test, and add a competency class for those who fail the test or are first time gun owners. Shit, give em First Aid/CPR while you’re at it for legitimate tourniquet training.

1

Comment Deleted

0

Anonymous #3 7w

Humanitarian funding for underdeveloped, over-exploited countries is good, and militarily funding for countries committing genocide is bad, whether it was Indonesia in the 70s or Israel now. There is zero contradiction or “gotcha” to be found in this position.

8

Anonymous #10 7w

That’s not consistent with “wants our tax dollars to be used for Americans”

-1

Anonymous #4 7w

Sure lol

1

Anonymous #3 7w

There is also no contradiction with “I would rather my taxes spent funding genocide be used for Americans” and “I support some of our taxes going to humanitarian infrastructure abroad”. USAID was, admittedly, also used for some genuinely evil shit in its heyday - fake polio campaign to target people in Af-Pak for death squad executions, funding contra type forces in LatAm, etc. – but none of that is why it got its funding cut by Trump lol

1

Anonymous #10 7w

That’s not what was said tho. His position was represented as “wanting to use tax dollars on Americans” and not “only wants to give our tax dollars away to things we approve of.”

-1

Anonymous #3 7w

humanitarian aid is philanthropy. iron dome is not. humanitarian aid can be much larger with the same amount of money that is used to give an iron dome. iron dome is dense, humanitarian aid is not.

4

Anonymous #9 7w

I was not the one who called it philanthropy. Nor did I make the claim in the first place for what was being advocated for. I’m well aware there’s a difference. But that’s not what was said. You don’t “just want tax dollars to be spent on Americans” if you just want to reallocate foreign spending elsewhere. You continue to further my point that it indeed is not consistent with the position stated

1

That is exactly what I’m advocating for — subsidizing these classes and even making firing ranges more common and accessible, particularly staffed by retired LEOs, veterans, or other relevant personnel. Plus by having these classes and ranges more widely available, people would be more competent in wielding their weapons too. Tbh we could even have explosives ranges where adrenaline junkies can legally use weapons they can’t legally own. 🤷🏼‍♀️ I guess it’s like people say: go far enough left…

1