3 ms·
> The police in Hong Kong would be a lot more respectful if the (massive, dense) crowd was armed with more than laser pointers This statement is laughable, yet
by EForEndeavour 7y ago
> The police in Hong Kong would be a lot more respectful if the (massive, dense) crowd was armed with more than laser pointers
This statement is laughable, yet terrifying in its naiveté.
> "Gun Control" was originally just a mechanism to keep the (black, brown) population from owning guns; just a way of disarming the black/brown population. Look at the past laws, and current policing!
The history of gun politics is inextricably tied to race, but your comment is as dismissive of gun control as it is unsupported and vague, as if waving your hands and dropping a hint of racial bias categorically invalidates arguments in favour of restricting firearms rights.
- analognoise 7y agoYeah, terrifying for the CCP, but not for the people. "Disarm the populace" is authoritarianism 101. The IRA, Checnya, Afghanistan - armed and motivated populations are dangerous. Not sure how that's naivete; that's why it was written into the Constitution. It isn't "a hint of racial bias" - gun control is directly racist, always has been. "Well it isn't now" doesn't hold much water.
- jki275 7y agoHis comment is exactly accurate. The US didn’t have gun control until the democrats enacted Jim Crow laws throughout the south. The entire purpose and history of gun control in the US was to keep black people from being able to defend themselves from the KKK.
- analognoise 7y agoIt WAY predates Jim Crow.