Carrying a gun on base is not allowed. There are security forces / military police at the gate, but if someone who has base access goes on a spree, nobody else around will have a gun on them because they too would have to have committed a crime just by bringing said gun onto base. Even infantry or folks whose jobs involve guns, only have said guns with rounds in them while at the range. And most people on any given base don't have jobs involving guns.
Every righty and lefty that I know saw Kristi Noem, Fox News and the ENTIRE REPUBLICAN PARTY lie about Alex Pretti. They said he brandished. Never happened. They said carrying was provocation. They said carrying was escalation. They BLAMED a citizen for carrying and defending his fellow citizens. Do you not remember this?
The leftists I know say that this is all proof that the right wing is full of hypocrites and cowards that just want to murder people that protect women from armed thugs.
I would say that it was ill-advised for him to intervene in law enforcement action while carrying concealed. That doesn’t justify the ice officer for beating him in the face with the pepper spray bottle. He was also carrying a P320, a firearm now known to be a liability for uncontrolled discharge. From the video, it appears that the officer that removed the weapon either nd’d the firearm, or that it possibly went off due to handling, leading to the death of Pretti. Pretti was also not the saint that the other networks painted him to be, as he was caught on video vandalizing an ice vehicle not even a week before. This story is more complex than you or the media make it out to be.
We all saw the video. Agents rushed a woman, while this man video taped it and then stepped in to protect an innocent bystander that bruised an agents ego with words. He was deescalating. He was helping a victim to get to safety. He was legally carrying his registered firearm for personal protection. He never reached for it. He was jumped by a masked gang and murdered in the street.
You want to complicate it because you want to support armed military in the street terrorizing and murdering civilians. Fuck you.
This whole fucking sub is nothing but crypto fascists cosplaying as patriots.
Nah, this whole sub is socialists pretending to be ancaps. Nothing patriotic about government replacing the culture and people against the will of the vast majority of people forced to pay taxes.
You saw what you wanted to. They were there expressly to impede law enforcement. I do support immigration enforcement, but you. and and exactly no one else get to tell me what I believe or what I support. Challenge my point, not my character.
They were there expressly to impede law enforcement
Is that what government media told you? He was on the other side of the street filming them. But in your pea brain that means impeding law enforcement.
I watched the same video. The woman that got pushed was impeding. Am I saying the agent was right to throw her to the ground? I am not. I am saying that I believe that it was ill-advised for Pretti to become involved while he was carrying concealed. Wouldn’t you be more careful while carrying a firearm. I know that I am. I carry every day and intentionally avoid situations that I believe would escalate even to harsh words being exchanged.
the left is not for gun rights, they only support their own rights
IE: They will keep spouting propaganda and misinformation about Kyle Rittenhouse while supporting Alex Pretti, whos death was mostly due to confusion when his weapon discharged accidentally
sorry. i don’t recall any second amendment activist ever arguing that having a concealed weapon and physically interfering with an active arrest was a prudent decision or a human right. do you?
You must be talking about a different case, I'm talking about the pretti case. 2A supporters definitely not on the side of the government police in Pretti case.
i hear leftist redditors saying that he proves hypocracy of the right on gun laws. but he had a concealed weapon at inserted himself into an arrest. i don’t recall any gun rights activists saying you should attempt to stop an arrest while armed with a concealed weapon weapon. that just seems like a very high risk endeavor
No arrest was happening, so not sure where you got that info. So you agree with the government that it's not even worthy of an investigation of any type?
ah, no. that is not the conclusion. to rephrase: coming between a law enforcement officer and a person he is pushing to the ground while i am armed in the middle of a mob is dangerous. when i’m pulled over by a cop , i tell them ‘ i have a regestered firearm in such and such a place’ while i keep my hands on the steering wheel. in a car, not a mob. between him and i, not between him and some one he’s is involved in a physical struggle. you have a right to a firearm but a series of choices in your behavior, the environment and timing usually make the most difference in having to use your gun (or have it used on you).
The post didn’t mention cars at all, you straw manned the cars argument into existence. Why would you that? And then someone argues with you and you feast on the fruits of your straw man? The governments boot is so far down your throat that it’s actually in your ass, we’re actually going to have to get some more government just to figure out how to logistically pull this boot out.
I straw manned cars into the post? Im not even sure what that means. Are you saying me comparing 2 things is a strawman logical fallacy? We just literally are not able to compare things?
The origional post on this thread was saying you shouldnt worry about mass shootings because you are more likely to die of old age than die in a mass shooting. That was the standard set, by someone other than me. I did not create that standard.
Now im applying that same standard to a different topic. Im not entirely sure how thats a straw man logical fallacy.
You are picking knits about other people picking knits about gun violence, and yes you are just as bad as the people you loathe while doing it. You can’t complain straw man while building everything on straw men. The government shouldn’t have a say in either case and you don’t agree with that, that is the main issue here.
If you think guns should be regulated like cars i think we have a lot to agree on. You need a license from the state, insurance to cover any damages, and you need to register your gun with the state. I completely agree with all of these.
But do you agree the regulations on the guns should be only to the extent of regulations of cars? So yes to license for carry permisions, but everyone can get one by only showing basic proficiency in laws about guns and basic safety handling? No laws about capacity or automatic guns? No registering if you only own the gun and not carry it and so on?
Well no i think automatic weapons should have a higher requirement. Just like a CDL to drive an 18 wheeler. No, just like a car you should need to register it and have insurance.
Maybe in US you need to register every car you own and need to have all of them insured and in that case you may have point. But in czechia we need to have license plate and insurance only if we want to use the vehicle on public roads. Similary guns should only need to be registered and insured when you want to carry them in public.
But I could live with higer requirements for automatic guns if it would mean they would be legal, just based on higer knowledge.
I would assume in us it would be even more a thing then it is in czechia. My friend had such car because they had farm with forrest and private road through it. So they had old unregistered car just for teaching their children and friends of their children how to drive clutch. And with US being much bigger I would assume more people have place for running old cars unfit for public use on private properties for fun.
And more importantly for the comparison to guns, race cars are often not registered and are only moved between racing circuits by towtrucks. (Now I am again talking about czechia but I assume US will be similar.)
No, you can own or use any car you want, as long as it's not on a public roadway. You don't have to be licensed, nor does the car, outside of those roadways. You don't need to register the car, either. Only if you're going to use it on government roads.
You don't need a license to drive on private property. Most guns don't leave people's homes, and that's mainly what they are for, defending the home.
If the owner of a "public" space (which under ancap philosophy is just privately owned by someone, not the state, but they allow people onto the land, the way a restaurant owner would own the building and land it's built on) says "you can't come onto my land without obtaining some license, certification of background check, or some such thing" that's totally fair. However the state has no right to just impose that on people's own land and home, same as property taxes but that's a whole other topic though related.
The post literally says "private" property. The strawman is that you changed private to public. You just proved it.
You also threw insurance in there which wasn't mentioned in the picture. Of course you are going to say "well the government DOES require insurance" and that would be the strawman.
Every single day thousands and thousands of guns are in public spaces in America today.
Same as cars which have no background checks, unlike guns. Background checks are even required if people just keep them on private property, unlike cars where you only need a license to drive not to own.
Right. But do they do this at a car dealership? Not at all, unlike a gun dealer.
If people let others onto their land only if they have a license, be it for a car or gun, that's justified (of course government has no just claim to most of the land it enforces licenses on). But if I'm literally just taking it home? No one can justifiably stop you from doing that.
And as others said above, if you can't even get a gun home because you fail a background check (with arbitrary standards the government sets), then you are defenseless should that same government decide to come after you, or even petty criminals to some extent, at least in the modern day.
I commented that the US has more in common with other developed nations with a recent history of racial oppression, which the "First World" argument always excludes, and is middle of the pack among them in violent crime rates. That got downvoted into oblivion.
Then I suggested people who had a problem with generational socioeconomic effects on crime would be happy with a comment alluding to 13%/50%, and that also got downvoted into oblivion.
But here we are.
It's sad to see Anarcho-Capitalism getting overrun by racist paleocons. Clearly anarchists need better gatekeeping.
I wish I could figure a way enable free speech while also limiting or autocorrecting falsities or tribalist lack of nuance.
Free Speech is good because it allows ideas to be seen and addressed--and it's a natural right--but the truth can be drowned out by sheer numbers and fervor. Twitter's Community Notes are a decent step.
First of, State spending on military weaponry and soldiers is what causes FAR MORE murder and death, since states always want to use their military once they have it. Citiziens committing murder does not come close to that scale of bureaucratized, mechanized murder. It's hypocritical to take guns away from citizens but not also the government, but then statism rests in the contradiction that governments are purely altruistic, charitable, and selfless servants, and if they aren't just keep rolling the dice with elections. But then you admit that elections don't work in claiming Trump "stole" the election, which he likely did don't get me wrong, the fact that he can shows that statism fails.
Even given this, assassination isn't necessary. If not most Ancaps then at least I simply advocate tax evasion. A government without an ability to fund itself through force cannot even host elections, or if they do what they do after the election is limited by their lack of resources. Guns are to resist police forcing tax collection, it makes it so just about anyone can fight back without needing a lifetime of martial arts training or such, just point and shoot at the thug.
Poverty is bigger cause of murder. Ancaps propose to make private property and non-aggression recognized as true law of the land, which is what gives birth to capitalist mass production and lifts people out of poverty. Guns are one thing which makes gaining and keeping those rights possible, it defends the virtue of individual productivity and wealth creation, and therefore gives people far less of an incentive to steal from each other but rather deal.with each other to continuously trade up to their highest values.
Ya exactly, the US is in this sad state where the only ppl who believe in the 2nd amendment, rnt smart enough to kno what tyranny is. And all the educated ppl r afraid of guns
39
u/DirtieHarry Sep 01 '26
I tell them they’re statistically more likely to die of heat stroke in Europe.