this post was submitted on 03 Oct 2025
32 points (94.4% liked)

Ask Lemmy

34924 readers
478 users here now

A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions


Rules: (interactive)


1) Be nice and; have funDoxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, and toxicity are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them


2) All posts must end with a '?'This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?


3) No spamPlease do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.


4) NSFW is okay, within reasonJust remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either !asklemmyafterdark@lemmy.world or !asklemmynsfw@lemmynsfw.com. NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].


5) This is not a support community.
It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions. If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email info@lemmy.world. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.


6) No US Politics.
Please don't post about current US Politics. If you need to do this, try !politicaldiscussion@lemmy.world or !askusa@discuss.online


Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.

Partnered Communities:

Tech Support

No Stupid Questions

You Should Know

Reddit

Jokes

Ask Ouija


Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Is this not the reason the second amendment exists? Regards An Australian Edit: I'm not advocating for violence. More so "a well regulated militia" which could be established by protesters or Democratic Governors for genuine self defence.

(page 2) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] twice_hatch@midwest.social 6 points 17 hours ago (2 children)

I believe open carry is illegal here in Illinois.

The meta I've heard is also that, if you're gonna brandish or draw a gun, you'd better be prepared to kill with it. I'm not prepared to die shooting cops so I don't feel like carrying. In the confusion of a gun fight I don't think I'd have much to add by shooting anyone

Like if someone told me that the 2nd amendment just causes more shootings and doesn't actually protect people on average I'd say yeah...

[–] whereyaaat@lemmings.world -3 points 9 hours ago (10 children)

The meta I’ve heard is also that, if you’re gonna brandish or draw a gun, you’d better be prepared to kill with it.

That's dumb as fuck.

Glad I stopped trying to find logic in the average person.

load more comments (10 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Wakmrow@lemmy.world 10 points 22 hours ago (1 children)

I'll give you a real answer instead of all of these other dork ass answers.

First, there aren't enough of us to do so.

Second, you really haven't thought through the repercussions of open carrying. Which relates to the first reason.

Open carrying puts a huge target on you. You need lots and lots of people to remain "safe". And you won't be safe. What are you going to do, shoot an ice agent if they try to arrest you? If that's your goal, why open carry? Do you think that the government here is going to suddenly follow constitutional law around a citizens right to bear arms? As they're literally illegally arresting people?

Sooner or later the amount of guns in this country is going to catch up to the ruling class but it's not going to be at a protest.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] stoly@lemmy.world 3 points 23 hours ago (1 children)

Because people who are legal concealed carry permit holders regularly get shot in the back by police. People who act like you can stand up to a major world military are idiots.

[–] RenLinwood@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 22 hours ago (3 children)

Don't turn your back on the police and don't face them alone, fucking duh. Cops are cowards, they'll be a lot more hesitant to shoot someone if there's a credible risk of dozens/hundreds of other people immediately shooting back.

[–] SwingingTheLamp@midwest.social 2 points 21 hours ago (1 children)

don’t face them alone

*pervasive surveillance state has entered the chat*

[–] RenLinwood@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 21 hours ago (1 children)

Idk how you figure that has anything to do with whether or not you open carry alone

[–] SwingingTheLamp@midwest.social 1 points 21 hours ago

How do you organize an armed group that's big enough to be effective without the fascists hearing about it in advance?

[–] fodor@lemmy.zip 0 points 20 hours ago (2 children)

No shit. That's the problem. You bring your friends and the cops will bring their tanks. Then what, have a dick measuring contest?

... Oh wait, they'll gun you all down and laugh about it instead.

So yeah, guns can be used, but let's not pretend flexing your firearm in public will easily accomplish your goal. Be thoughtful and careful about when and where.

[–] RenLinwood@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 19 hours ago (3 children)

We had tanks in Afghanistan, didn't stop us from losing. Nobody in history, no matter how well armed, has ever won a war against a dedicated insurgency.

[–] Knoxvomica@lemmy.ca 1 points 18 hours ago

This right here. Asymmetrical warfare is terrible for modern occupying armies.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] stoly@lemmy.world 0 points 22 hours ago* (last edited 22 hours ago) (1 children)

No, that's when the tanks come in. Have you forgotten that the police have used airplanes and bombs to subdue people? They have even destroyed entire neighborhoods. In what world do you live where you think you can win here? You will be squashed just like millions before you and the world will keep turning.

[–] RenLinwood@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 21 hours ago* (last edited 21 hours ago) (9 children)

Nobody in human history has ever won a war against a dedicated insurgency. You're historically/militarily illiterate and a coward.

[–] stoly@lemmy.world 0 points 21 hours ago (1 children)

And you stopped arguing and started making personal attacks so this conversation serves no further purpose.

[–] RenLinwood@lemmy.blahaj.zone 0 points 21 hours ago (1 children)

No, I made a coherent historical argument and then accurately personally attacked you, you're using the second part as an excuse to ignore the first part but we both know you've got no counter-argument. Like I said, fucking coward.

[–] michaelmrose@lemmy.world 0 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

The answer is that people aren't willing to die in the tens of thousands to millions when they hope to unseat the scum in 26 ot 28

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (8 replies)
[–] phoenixz@lemmy.ca 1 points 23 hours ago (1 children)

Because trump is hoping people will do something stupid so that he can overreact and put the entire country in lock down?

Unless you're going for a violent uprising, violent protests typically do less than large scale continuous peaceful protests

The problem is that the latter also doesn't happen in the US, it's as if Americans just don't care..

Oh yes, I know the excuses, we have a job, we have a family to feed, and DUDE YOU ARE A JEW IN GERMANY 1934, WOULD YOU PLEASE FRIGGING DO SOMETHING ALREADY?

[–] JandroDelSol@lemmy.world 2 points 23 hours ago

even if no one does anything drastic, trump will escalate anyway. we may get something staged like with charlie kirk, but they may not even find a bullshit reason to justify themselves.

[–] turkalino@lemmy.yachts 7 points 1 day ago (25 children)

Can’t tell if this is a sarcastic question or not but opposing the government with guns is a delusion held by conservatives who think their AR-15s have a chance against a government with drones, tanks, etc. That belief was true when the Bill of Rights was written and the military just had muskets and a couple cannons but anyone who believes that now is insane

Plus, our police shoot unarmed people and get away with it, what do you think is gonna happen if they see you open carrying?

[–] zout@fedia.io 5 points 1 day ago (1 children)

what do you think is gonna happen if they see you open carrying?

Well, at the school shooting in Uvalde, they were quick on the scene but waited 77 minutes to do anything since there was someone with a gun inside. So, cowering away might be an option.

[–] normonator@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 day ago

Not just waited, prevented others from taking action.

[–] Shiggles@sh.itjust.works 4 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Even when the government just had a couple cannons, Shay’s Rebellion didn’t exactly go great.

That being said, guns aren’t just used for open rebellion. The Panthers sure made it tough for a cop to feel like a big man just because he had a gun. If we want to examine when things get really bad, simply look at partisan resistance to the Nazis all throughout WWII.

Yes, an AR-15 won’t beat an F-16. But F-16s aren’t the ones goosestepping brown people into camps right now.

[–] SupraMario@lemmy.world 5 points 1 day ago (14 children)

I never understood this dumb argument from anti-2a people. We, the strongest military to have ever existed in the history of the world...lost Vietnam, lost iraq, lost Afghanistan, and tied in Korea.

Planes can't patrol street corners. You need boots and they need to be willing to kill their countrymen and be doing it for a paycheck.

[–] Objection@lemmy.ml 1 points 23 hours ago

lost Vietnam, lost iraq, lost Afghanistan, and tied in Korea.

But we're not talking about Vietnam, Iraq, etc.

In many of these cases, the people in these countries had experience living under unimaginably harsh colonial rule, and understood that that was what was in store for them if they lost. Guerilla warfare is hell, especially for the side of the guerillas. It's very rare that anyone chooses that route unless they have no other choice. Also, there was generally a more unified culture and a clarity of vision for what they were fighting for.

You take a random sample of 100 Americans, at least a third will actively support the enemy side and sell you out. Of those who aren't opposed, a lot will be able to just keep their heads down and go about their lives, coming home to play video games and jerk off for as long as they have that option. Of those willing to get involved, many will limit their opposition to nonviolence and whatever form of protest the state permits. So now you've got, like, three people who are actually willing to fight and not just go home at the first sign of danger, and those three people probably hate each other for subscribing to slightly different ideologies which have different takes on events from 100 years ago.

Contrast that with a random sample of 100 Vietnamese at the time of the war. There's no comparison.

load more comments (13 replies)
load more comments (23 replies)
[–] Badabinski@kbin.earth 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

The No Kings protest in Utah ended tragically because armed "peacekeepers" (aka armed civilians) shot at a protester who was open-carrying an AR-15 at the protest. The protester had no ill intentions, but the peacekeepers didn't know that. The peacekeepers missed and killed a bystander.

That's why you don't open carry at protests. The untrained "good guy with a gun" is likely to shoot you. Carry concealed if you're going to carry, or don't bring a gun at all.

[–] Cort@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago (3 children)

That's not accurate.

The person shot and killed (Mr. Ah-loo) was unarmed. He was struck by a round fired at someone (mr. Gamboa) who had snuck out of the protest and returned with an AR-15.

Gamboa was arrested for attempted murder, and the person who fired the shot is/was being investigated, but has not been arrested/charged at this time

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] peoplebeproblems@midwest.social 3 points 1 day ago (2 children)

There's a reason they're trying their damndest to provoke people into a shooting match but:

Yes.

However, the idea was created in mind so that everyone could be armed in case this very thing happened to occur BUT did not take into consideration advancement in technology, and the ability of the federal government to restrict arms.

Based on the photos I've seen, the feds are wearing plate carriers - level IV body armor, designed to stop a .30-06 round. If it's level 3, it's gonna stop .223 (Ar-15).

Very few citizens have automatic weapons. You can't own an RPG without the the right documents. Explosive manufacturing is dangerous, and difficult.

You can't match federal firepower with the second amendment.

The feds are currently using coward tactics. They are kidnapping people who can't afford decent housing, let alone smartphones. They go in fast, kidnap everyone, and get out. Even with armed people, they wouldn't be able to respond fast enough.

That's why all of us Americans can quickly tell when someone is just trying to start shit when they get angry online..

There are ways to fight back. But they require patience, communication, planning, subterfuge, and more importantly OPSEC. Otherwise the regime just slaughters everyone like they want to.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Truscape@lemmy.blahaj.zone 4 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Look up what happened to the Black Panther Party (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Panther_Party).

If people showed up organized and armed, the Federal government would be more than happy to use under the table tactics to make sure we'd never see our families again.

With that being said, I wouldn't be surprise if people are armed but just not being public about it. Armed protestors are usually the nuclear option for any movement, but it's good to have that unspoken option on the table behind the scenes.

[–] zeroday@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 17 hours ago

This, why would a given group of protestors all open carry? I'd expect a mass of conceal-carried weapons, though.

[–] Formfiller@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Because the White House is looking for an excuse to have the military start slaughtering civilians and imprisoning democrats. A general strike is what we need to do

[–] SoftestSapphic@lemmy.world 4 points 1 day ago (3 children)

At a certain point we have to fight back.

The argument of "we can't respond to their violence with violence or they will become more violent" doesn't hold water when they are getting increasingly violent anyway.

It's a coward's fallacy

[–] Formfiller@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago (7 children)

I do understand your point but the military was told to attack and commit war crimes on American civilians so I just think that a general strike would be the most effective strategy in the situation we currently face. That’s just my opinion on the approach that would be the most efficient at this time.

load more comments (7 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›