5 ms·

I can say whatever I want; as long as I am not threatening someone else's life or liberty. These things are well defined. Nobody is going to knock on my door to

I can say whatever I want; as long as I am not threatening someone else's life or liberty. These things are well defined. Nobody is going to knock on my door tomorrow. The same is not true for you if you live under their laws, you couldn't agree with me if you wanted to. The system you defend is banning sharp objects. We have sharp objects to prevent exactly what I pointed out is wrong. We can defend ourselves and others around us. The US is a wonderful amazing place. I welcome you to visit or immigrate and make a life here. Heck, hit me up.

Kuinox 2y ago
https://theonion.com/no-way-to-prevent-this-says-only-nation-where-this-r-1819576527/ https://theonion.com/no-way-to-prevent-this-says-only-nation...
stavros 2y ago
I was with you until the last paragraph. The notion that the people of the US can rise up against the US army and last more than two seconds is ridiculous. You have sharp objects and all you do with them is kill yourselves and each other.
- jakeogh 2y ago
  https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USCODE-2011-title10/html/USCODE-2011-title10-subtitleA-partII-chap31-sec502.htm https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USCODE-2011-title10/html... (a) Enlistment Oath.—Each person enlisting in an armed force shall take the following oath: “I, ____________________, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God.” These are the people that care about our way of life the most. Your assumption is incorrect even if you assume that the US Mil has the ability to suppress the US population en mass without destroying it's self. They are not robots.
  - stavros 2y ago
    Oh man, if only other countries that became military dictatorships had the foresight to make the soldiers swear an oath, they could have avoided the whole thing.
    - jakeogh 2y ago
      You ignored my comment on the oath. Setting that aside, perhaps you know of another country with a voluntary force and a judicial branch upholding Heller[1] and Bruen[2]? Even a cursory understanding of mil force is enough to seriously question your unsupported assumption. It's why we have the 2nd right after the 1st. [1] Justice Antonin Scalia reading Heller(2008)[1] for the majority: https://s3.amazonaws.com/oyez.case-media.ogg/case_data/2007/07-290/20080626o_07-290.ogg https://s3.amazonaws.com/oyez.case-media.ogg/case_data/2007/... [2] https://www.oyez.org/cases/2021/20-843 https://www.oyez.org/cases/2021/20-843
- ineedaj0b 2y ago
  cqc is the most deadly form of combat, and america has something like 4 guns per resident. if Ukraine is any indication, pacifying a well armed citizenry is not an easy feat.
  - latentcall 2y ago
    A well armed citizenry in mobility scooters freshly fed with McDonalds and chocolate cake attacks!
  - croes 2y ago
    Since the Russian invasion until November 2023 30,000 soldiers where killed. >In 2023, 43,163 people died in the United States from gun related injuries. Seems like the deadlier form of combat is just living in the US.
    - t0bia_s 2y ago
      Ukraine has 33 mil., US 334 mil. of population. You comparing apples with oranges.
      - paulryanrogers 2y ago
        The US also isn't facing an invading army!
        t0bia_s 2y ago
        But also act as invider many times in history.
        paulryanrogers 2y ago
        What does that have to do with comparing deaths of civilians within the homeland?
        2y ago
- technothrasher 2y ago
  I find the parent poster's wholesale purchase of American exceptionalism... optimistic, to be kind. But I also think you're over optimistic thinking it is a forgone conclusion that any military, regardless of any bill of rights, would be able to easily crush a popular revolt. That depends upon a lot of factors.
  - stavros 2y ago
    Of course, and the counterpoint is that there have been revolts that toppled governments. The issue is that pro-gun people take it as a given that the US army, a body of people with both vastly more training and more firepower than the population, will have trouble with it.
    - milkshakes 2y ago
      it's happening right now in bangladesh, no guns necessary
- pyuser583 2y ago
  The US isn’t anywhere near a civil war. But for the sake of argument … The US Military is heavily dependent on reservists. There are tons of veterans with military training. The US military has a terrible record against insurgents. Soliders ordered to attack their friends and family go awol. The US military does bot train to suppress a wide scale domestic insurrection. America is blissfully far from a civil war, bit our heavily armed populace could give the military a run for its money.
- zxcvbnm69 2y ago
  [dead]
exe34 2y ago
you think your guns protect you from your government? how much koolaid have you drunk?
chgs 2y ago
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_free_speech_exceptions https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_free_speech_ex... You think your limits are the correct ones. Others believe picketing funerals with hate but banning porn is the wrong balance.
latentcall 2y ago
> The US is a wonderful amazing place. Do you really believe this?
- vixen99 2y ago
  Any country that can roll on normally with a debt of $35 trillion has to be amazing.
edent 2y ago
> I can say whatever I want; as long as I am not threatening someone else's life or liberty. The people who are in jail for, as you claim "offending others online" were threatening people's lives. > The system you defend is banning sharp objects Again, not true. I can buy as many sharp objects as I want. I can even take them out in public if I want. The law even allows me to use them for self defence. We've had a problem with some people buying weaponry - and it is weaponry which has been banned. You can go into any DIY store and buy all the knives, machetes, and chainsaws that you want. > The US is a wonderful amazing place. I would encourage you to join the 40% of your fellow citizens who have passports and go explore the world rather than reading about it.
- sva_ 2y ago
  > I can buy as many sharp objects as I want. I can even take them out in public if I want. https://mk-law.co.uk/new-law-targets-zombie-knives-and-machetes-with-upcoming-ban/ https://mk-law.co.uk/new-law-targets-zombie-knives-and-mache... Oddly specific rules though
  - edent 2y ago
    Sharp objects are not the same as weaponry. The US Constitution says something about the right to bear arms, but I don't think you're allowed to own a landmine or nuclear bomb, right?
  - adrian_b 2y ago
    Assuming that the rules enumerated at that link are the complete rules, I have a Japanese bread knife that I use every day for its exquisite sharpness, and which would become forbidden by these rules. The reason is that it has a 9-inch serrated blade, which is a very frequently encountered size for bread knives, and the angle at the tip of the blade is slightly smaller than the 90 degree angle mandated by the new rules. The slightly acute blade tip is very handy when cutting some big hard vegetables, like water melons or pumpkins, or some very big breads, which have a diameter greater than the 9-inch blade length. The rules as written on that site are ambiguous, because they could be also interpreted as only forbidding the 2-edged blades, where one edge is plain and one edge is serrated (a kind of knife that I have never seen). However this interpretation of the rules is contradicted by "other than a serrated cutting edge of up to two inches next to the handle", which is a typical feature of single-edged blades and which would not make sense on a 2-edged blade. The rules still allow the possession of a fighting/utility knife, like the classic KA-BAR, whose blade is only 7-in long and which has a small serrated edge that satisfies the rules.
matthewmacleod 2y ago
Honestly, this is just kind of shallow conversation if you don’t engage honestly with it. Both US and UK societies have the general concept of freedom on speech - you are free to say what you want for the most part, subject to some specific limits on that right where the speech infringes on someone else’s rights. These rights are codified, came about, and are implemented slightly differently - but in practice the difference you’re identifying is really more about what the respective societies define as acceptable. In recent cases, the people who’ve been jailed have been done so for (among other things) incitement to racial hatred - things like public posts encouraging people to commit specific acts. The UK considers this outside the bounds of acceptable free speech. The US maybe considers this boundary elsewhere, but it is clear that some forms of expression can constitute harassment or other criminality even in the US. The interesting discussion is the bit in the middle - how do we build a messy consensus that deals with our differences and protects as many people’s rights to live peacefully as possible, while still allowing others to speak freely and without fear. A discussion from the starting point of “I can say whatever I want” when it is demonstrably not true doesn’t really engage with that. The US is indeed a wonderful and amazing place full of incredible people. It would be even more wonderful and amazing with occasional bouts of self-reflection.
croes 2y ago
You banned Kinder surprise eggs and have more school shootings per month than others in a decade. You had the January 6 United States Capitol attack because field by the former president which led to the death of five people. Somehow Americans fear to become a tyranny (maybe because of all the armed people) and at the same time ignore all the people already dying like they were already living in a tyranny. I'm from a country that was turned in a tyranny but I fear people with guns more than my government. >The US is a wonderful amazing place. Have you been to other countries?

Kuinox 2y ago

https://theonion.com/no-way-to-prevent-this-says-only-nation-where-this-r-1819576527/ https://theonion.com/no-way-to-prevent-this-says-only-nation...

stavros 2y ago

I was with you until the last paragraph. The notion that the people of the US can rise up against the US army and last more than two seconds is ridiculous. You have sharp objects and all you do with them is kill yourselves and each other.

jakeogh 2y ago
https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USCODE-2011-title10/html/USCODE-2011-title10-subtitleA-partII-chap31-sec502.htm https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USCODE-2011-title10/html... (a) Enlistment Oath.—Each person enlisting in an armed force shall take the following oath: “I, ____________________, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God.” These are the people that care about our way of life the most. Your assumption is incorrect even if you assume that the US Mil has the ability to suppress the US population en mass without destroying it's self. They are not robots.
- stavros 2y ago
  Oh man, if only other countries that became military dictatorships had the foresight to make the soldiers swear an oath, they could have avoided the whole thing.
  - jakeogh 2y ago
    You ignored my comment on the oath. Setting that aside, perhaps you know of another country with a voluntary force and a judicial branch upholding Heller[1] and Bruen[2]? Even a cursory understanding of mil force is enough to seriously question your unsupported assumption. It's why we have the 2nd right after the 1st. [1] Justice Antonin Scalia reading Heller(2008)[1] for the majority: https://s3.amazonaws.com/oyez.case-media.ogg/case_data/2007/07-290/20080626o_07-290.ogg https://s3.amazonaws.com/oyez.case-media.ogg/case_data/2007/... [2] https://www.oyez.org/cases/2021/20-843 https://www.oyez.org/cases/2021/20-843
ineedaj0b 2y ago
cqc is the most deadly form of combat, and america has something like 4 guns per resident. if Ukraine is any indication, pacifying a well armed citizenry is not an easy feat.
- latentcall 2y ago
  A well armed citizenry in mobility scooters freshly fed with McDonalds and chocolate cake attacks!
- croes 2y ago
  Since the Russian invasion until November 2023 30,000 soldiers where killed. >In 2023, 43,163 people died in the United States from gun related injuries. Seems like the deadlier form of combat is just living in the US.
  - t0bia_s 2y ago
    Ukraine has 33 mil., US 334 mil. of population. You comparing apples with oranges.
    - paulryanrogers 2y ago
      The US also isn't facing an invading army!
      - t0bia_s 2y ago
        But also act as invider many times in history.
        paulryanrogers 2y ago
        What does that have to do with comparing deaths of civilians within the homeland?
        2y ago
technothrasher 2y ago
I find the parent poster's wholesale purchase of American exceptionalism... optimistic, to be kind. But I also think you're over optimistic thinking it is a forgone conclusion that any military, regardless of any bill of rights, would be able to easily crush a popular revolt. That depends upon a lot of factors.
- stavros 2y ago
  Of course, and the counterpoint is that there have been revolts that toppled governments. The issue is that pro-gun people take it as a given that the US army, a body of people with both vastly more training and more firepower than the population, will have trouble with it.
  - milkshakes 2y ago
    it's happening right now in bangladesh, no guns necessary
pyuser583 2y ago
The US isn’t anywhere near a civil war. But for the sake of argument … The US Military is heavily dependent on reservists. There are tons of veterans with military training. The US military has a terrible record against insurgents. Soliders ordered to attack their friends and family go awol. The US military does bot train to suppress a wide scale domestic insurrection. America is blissfully far from a civil war, bit our heavily armed populace could give the military a run for its money.
zxcvbnm69 2y ago
[dead]

exe34 2y ago

you think your guns protect you from your government? how much koolaid have you drunk?

chgs 2y ago

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_free_speech_exceptions https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_free_speech_ex... You think your limits are the correct ones. Others believe picketing funerals with hate but banning porn is the wrong balance.

latentcall 2y ago

> The US is a wonderful amazing place. Do you really believe this?

vixen99 2y ago
Any country that can roll on normally with a debt of $35 trillion has to be amazing.

edent 2y ago

> I can say whatever I want; as long as I am not threatening someone else's life or liberty. The people who are in jail for, as you claim "offending others online" were threatening people's lives. > The system you defend is banning sharp objects Again, not true. I can buy as many sharp objects as I want. I can even take them out in public if I want. The law even allows me to use them for self defence. We've had a problem with some people buying weaponry - and it is weaponry which has been banned. You can go into any DIY store and buy all the knives, machetes, and chainsaws that you want. > The US is a wonderful amazing place. I would encourage you to join the 40% of your fellow citizens who have passports and go explore the world rather than reading about it.

sva_ 2y ago
> I can buy as many sharp objects as I want. I can even take them out in public if I want. https://mk-law.co.uk/new-law-targets-zombie-knives-and-machetes-with-upcoming-ban/ https://mk-law.co.uk/new-law-targets-zombie-knives-and-mache... Oddly specific rules though
- edent 2y ago
  Sharp objects are not the same as weaponry. The US Constitution says something about the right to bear arms, but I don't think you're allowed to own a landmine or nuclear bomb, right?
- adrian_b 2y ago
  Assuming that the rules enumerated at that link are the complete rules, I have a Japanese bread knife that I use every day for its exquisite sharpness, and which would become forbidden by these rules. The reason is that it has a 9-inch serrated blade, which is a very frequently encountered size for bread knives, and the angle at the tip of the blade is slightly smaller than the 90 degree angle mandated by the new rules. The slightly acute blade tip is very handy when cutting some big hard vegetables, like water melons or pumpkins, or some very big breads, which have a diameter greater than the 9-inch blade length. The rules as written on that site are ambiguous, because they could be also interpreted as only forbidding the 2-edged blades, where one edge is plain and one edge is serrated (a kind of knife that I have never seen). However this interpretation of the rules is contradicted by "other than a serrated cutting edge of up to two inches next to the handle", which is a typical feature of single-edged blades and which would not make sense on a 2-edged blade. The rules still allow the possession of a fighting/utility knife, like the classic KA-BAR, whose blade is only 7-in long and which has a small serrated edge that satisfies the rules.

matthewmacleod 2y ago

Honestly, this is just kind of shallow conversation if you don’t engage honestly with it. Both US and UK societies have the general concept of freedom on speech - you are free to say what you want for the most part, subject to some specific limits on that right where the speech infringes on someone else’s rights. These rights are codified, came about, and are implemented slightly differently - but in practice the difference you’re identifying is really more about what the respective societies define as acceptable. In recent cases, the people who’ve been jailed have been done so for (among other things) incitement to racial hatred - things like public posts encouraging people to commit specific acts. The UK considers this outside the bounds of acceptable free speech. The US maybe considers this boundary elsewhere, but it is clear that some forms of expression can constitute harassment or other criminality even in the US. The interesting discussion is the bit in the middle - how do we build a messy consensus that deals with our differences and protects as many people’s rights to live peacefully as possible, while still allowing others to speak freely and without fear. A discussion from the starting point of “I can say whatever I want” when it is demonstrably not true doesn’t really engage with that. The US is indeed a wonderful and amazing place full of incredible people. It would be even more wonderful and amazing with occasional bouts of self-reflection.

croes 2y ago

You banned Kinder surprise eggs and have more school shootings per month than others in a decade. You had the January 6 United States Capitol attack because field by the former president which led to the death of five people. Somehow Americans fear to become a tyranny (maybe because of all the armed people) and at the same time ignore all the people already dying like they were already living in a tyranny. I'm from a country that was turned in a tyranny but I fear people with guns more than my government. >The US is a wonderful amazing place. Have you been to other countries?