8 ms·

Dear citizens of the EU: If this gets pushed through, you will gradually lose control of your government much like how the people of the UK already lost contro

Dear citizens of the EU: If this gets pushed through, you will gradually lose control of your government much like how the people of the UK already lost control of theirs. What are you going to do when the government's interests inevitably drift out of alignment with yours? Start a political movement? You will have the police knocking on your door for criticizing the establishment. Start a revolution? You have no weapons. You can't even organize a resistance because all channels of communication are monitored. You have neither the pen nor the sword. There is no longer an incentive for the government to serve you, and so it eventually won't. No amount of protest will recover the freedom you once had. You're heading towards a society where everyone feels oppressed but no one can do anything about it.

bigyabai 1y ago
Dear citizens of the US: Please stop funding, allying with and protecting the manufacturers of surveillance tools. Stop exporting Palantir products and importing privacy-destroying devices from businesses like Greyshift and Cellebrite. Insist that the US government stop shielding hackers-for-hire like NSO Group who indiscriminately lease their products for discriminatory and illegal purposes. Stop defending "OEM" control that we have all known is a stand-in for federal steering since the Snowden leaks. Stop marketing E2EE while backdooring server and client hardware for "emergency" purposes. Do that, and you'll never be accused of hypocrisy again. Signed, a US citizen.
- theodric 1y ago
  Collective guilt projection is incredibly unfair. What is the average US citizen expected to do in this? I hereby promise not to buy any weapons systems from Palantir or use Cellebrite if I forget my phone's PIN code. Am I one of the good ones now?
  - bigyabai 1y ago
    My point is to highlight the hypocrisy in HN casting stones from a glass house. I don't really believe you're beholden to fixing it (as I said, I'm a US citizen too). We just have to accept that the United States started this and is the only nation on Earth that can stop it. American surveillance technology is the role-model for abusive regimes and perfectly sensible governments around the world.
  - baobun 1y ago
    A bunch of people pursuing or considering careers at those companies are hanging out here. Changing their minds should count for something.
sph 1y ago
> Start a revolution? You have no weapons. LOL. People nowadays don't start revolutions not because of weapons or lack thereof. It's because they're thoroughly entertained and fed; even the entire political circus is a sort of morbid reality show: people tune in to the news to shake their head in disgust at today's latest antics, and will do so tomorrow, because it's all panem et circenses for grown-ups. The Internet has become the greatest instrument of mass control ever created in the history of the world. It's done. As long people have their Doordash and Netflix, and are too busy working or scrolling instead of thinking deep thoughts, and reading anarchist philosophy, the kings has nothing to fear. Also, no need to single out the EU. The entire government-as-reality-TV is well and truly an American creation, and your three-letter agencies don't even have to pass any laws to collect information about its citizens. We're all in the same shit, my brother/sister.
- gjsman-1000 1y ago
  > and reading anarchist philosophy That's literally how we got here. People got a taste of unmitigated unprecedented freedom online for the last three decades, and found it so gross that they allowed things to swing the other way. Even one decade ago, the threat of SOPA/PIPA rallied the internet successfully. Just over a decade later, we're at the point of allowing age verification, for morality's sake, without hardly a peep. The cypherpunks are losing, hard, and honestly, deserve failure for how well their utopia turned out.
  - bigyabai 1y ago
    How we literally "got here" was Section 230. You can easily stifle free speech by holding Facebook and X accountable for every single post ever made on their platforms. But that would capsize the American investment economy, so we have to protect them just a little bit. It creates a perverse, bipartisan incentive to export the most reprehensible opinions that still qualify as legal. European citizens (and soon, American ones too) are discovering that they never held the cards. When you ask your OEMs, cloud providers and DNS resolver who's side they're really on, it's not yours. You, the customer, hold no guillotine over their head.
  - 1y ago
nickslaughter02 1y ago
> you will gradually lose control of your government That happened the moment European countries surrendered their sovereignty to EU.
- gambiting 1y ago
  Which of course never happened, as each member country retains full sovereignty in every possible way you can think of, which is actually fully enshrined in the way EU works.
  - nickslaughter02 1y ago
    > Which of course never happened, as each member country retains full sovereignty in every possible way you can think of, which is actually fully enshrined in the way EU works. Which of course is false. > The principle was derived from an interpretation of the European Court of Justice, which ruled that European law has priority over any contravening national law, including the constitution of a member state itself. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primacy_of_European_Union_law https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primacy_of_European_Union_law
    - gambiting 1y ago
      And if you read literally one paragraph from the bit that you quoted: "The majority of national courts have generally recognized and accepted this principle, except for the part where European law outranks a member state's constitution. As a result, national constitutional courts have also reserved the right to review the conformity of EU law with national constitutional law" And guess why and how they are able to do that - that's right, by retaining full sovereignty of their own justice systems. Even obeying rulings of the ECHR is purely a matter of courtesy more than anything, as neither EU nor ECHR have any enforcement mechanism beyond withholding funding, as many EU member states have proven time and time and time again.
      - nickslaughter02 1y ago
        I'm looking forward to seeing this in practice when Chat Control passes.
JohnLocke4 1y ago
>You can't even organize a resistance because all channels of communication are monitored. One of the awful things about this proposed legislation is that what I quoted you saying is not true. Software like PGP is easy to use, and criminals already do. The government has absolutely no possibility of breaking RSA the way things are now, and as such scanning all messages will do nothing other than prove more definitively that criminals are still beyond their gavel. In reality, the only individuals who will get spied on are regular people who don't open their terminal just to send a text; exactly the people who should not be spied on in the first place. When the government realizes this invasive legislature is ineffective, they will probably crack down even harder. After all, what we are willing to accept from rulers has by the looks of it already increased dramatically. I wonder if it at some point it becomes illegal simply to posses encryption software on your personal devices, perhaps even possession of prime numbers that could theoretically be used in modern encryption. How far will the government go to take this illegal math from you?
- hsbauauvhabzb 1y ago
  Both apple and android are teeing their infra up to support deleting apps they don’t like. Windows is moving towards e2e attestation, and Mac is basically already there. Once that’s all done, you just need to enforce hardware manufacturers boot only into ‘trusted’ operating systems. No more Linux. No more unsigned execution. No more encryption.
  - hellojesus 1y ago
    Plausible, but then people will use old computers and/or fab their own and/or import from adversarial governments and accept the risk of hardware backdoors.
  - Juliate 1y ago
    Won’t happen. There is way too much existing deployed systems depending on alternative open source systems, and a mn incentive to use them to keep using old hardware. And way too strong a strategic incentive not to depend on US tech alone.
troupo 1y ago
> Start a revolution? You have no weapons. You can't even organize a resistance because all channels of communication are monitored. Unlike which country? The US I presume? I see very much a lack of any revolutions in the US, and the most resistance done in the past few decades was done by people with no weapons. I'd say most revolution-like movements of any kind in the US since the Civil War happened without weapons.
- rfrey 1y ago
  Even further, those who have traditionally been most vocal about second amendment rights are currently the biggest cheerleaders for the current authoritarian trend. Quite the plot twist.
  - deleted 1y ago
    [deleted]
jansper39 1y ago
>you will gradually lose control of your government much like how the people of the UK already lost control of theirs. As a UK citizen, can you explain your reasoning here? We haven't implemented anything like the chat control proposal and while a few politicians have brought up similar ideas, there is a lot of pushback against it.
- drnick1 1y ago
  Age verification, while trivial to bypass (for now), has brought you closer to further privacy-invading restrictions. Next, VPNs will be attacked. Then it will be unsigned apps on "untrusted" operating systems.
  - ycombigators 1y ago
    Anonymity is not privacy.
    - noncoml 1y ago
      VPN is not only for anonymity
      - ycombigators 1y ago
        I'm not sure what point you are making, but isn't the one I was responding to.
    - ang_cire 1y ago
      The mechanisms that attack one attack the other as well. The apparatuses which exist to de-anonymize communication also remove the ability to definitively keep the content of the communication private, and no government (UK or EU or US, etc) that has proposed a ChatControl-like scheme has ever used a method that did not allow them to do both. If a porn site checks my ID against a gov database, the gov now knows I went to that porn site. That is a loss of both anonymity and privacy.
chaosbolt 1y ago
It's already this dystopic, like any medium where people can talk freely gets eventually controlled by corrupt politicians etc. Anyways, the control of speech isn't only in surveillance, it's ingrained deeply in culture, taboos, education, etc. I have talked to religious people before, they all exhibited a certain characteristic, you could talk about somethings but you can't touch on other things, their mind won't accept it, so they bug and start saying nonsense. I've noticed the same thing with most people when it comes to certain subjects, you'd be talking to an educated person with a relatively high IQ and a mind that is capable to think critically in certain domains, yet once you point out something their mind has been trained to deem anti cultural (like for example who controls what), they turn into Agent Smith and they stop listening to reason. Anyways, this is HN so what I'm saying is that the control of the controllers is already absolute, it's been linearly increasing for years, they'd cause something then tighten their control of us for "our safety", until one day we get enough and some take out the guillotines and others the bald eagle etc. been happening for millenia, if we as a species were able to rebel on authority before s*it absolutely hit the fan, history would've been a lot cleaner.
dekken_ 1y ago
> you will gradually lose control of your government Already happened. That this keeps getting put forward is the evidence. Representative democracy, is not a democracy at all. Sic semper tyrannis.
TeMPOraL 1y ago
> Start a revolution? You have no weapons. (...) You have neither the pen nor the sword. We still have Euros. As long as enough companies and rich folk are more on our side than theirs, the government still has some incentive to serve us. I know, I know - money and politics, wealth and power, they go together at the high end. But there is the oft forgotten long tail, the rich and powerful at the scale of a city, a neighborhood, a niche market. Those tend to side with communities they live in, and in aggregate they still have plenty of pull with the rulers (which in stable times they use to block all kinds of potentially useful legislation, but still, good to have them come the hard times). Weapons won't matter all that much anyway, for several reasons: 1) Life, especially in the EU, is not like in an American action movie; 2) Citizens here may be significantly less armed, but the same is true of government officials, and even law enforcement is significantly less armed. It kind of evens out, unless military gets involved, but at that point all bets are off - no different than in the US. 3) Firearms have a habit of magically appearing in bulk the moment a revolution starts. When it happens, it's a good indicator you should GTFO somewhere far away, as you're being played by whoever is supplying the weapons to your side.
- bfg_9k 1y ago
  > 2) Citizens here may be significantly less armed, but the same is true of government officials, and even law enforcement is significantly less armed. It kind of evens out, unless military gets involved, but at that point all bets are off - no different than in the US. I don't think that's a correct comparison. If shit ever did hit the proverbial fan, you can bet that any US military walking around an American city would be constantly worried about getting a lead injection from any Tom, Dick or Harry who's got a firearm. I don't think the same can be said for the vast majority of European cities (assuming the military gets involved).
  - JumpCrisscross 1y ago
    To say nothing of equipping a guerilla force in the event of a civil war. (Something nobody sane should fantasise about, by the way.)
  - willy_k 1y ago
ycombigators 1y ago
"much like how the people of the UK already lost control of theirs" What are you on about, mate?
- Popeyes 1y ago
  Get your Bacofoil for this thread.
TacticalCoder 1y ago
[dead]
111111101101 1y ago
> Start a revolution? You have no weapons. Always this cope from Americans. A broad revolutionary movement will have sympathisers in the military and police. They can raid the governments armouries. The IRA became infamous for arms raids.
ohman876 1y ago
> If this gets pushed through, you will gradually lose control of your government A little bit off-topic but so called president of the EU is not elected, nor are the figures in so called EU commission :)
- danielscrubs 1y ago
  Brexit was an awful thing, BUT it will increase democracy for both parties. EU needs to be made more democratic or we need to severely limit its power, as its original intent, because the current show is just a farce.
  - tpm 1y ago
    Brexit did not and will not 'increase democracy' in any way anywhere.
    - danielscrubs 1y ago
      It will, in time. You basically cut the hierarchy in half. A citizen can now meet their politician in the supermarket. The other parts necessary is transparency and democracy but those are on other orthogonal axis.
      - tpm 1y ago
        It won't, you haven't cut any hierarchy, that's not how the EU works (but the UK let themselves get disinformed about that for decades by certain Mr. Johnson and others). A citizen can meet the politician in the supermarket in the same way as before and it does not matter, because the politician lied to him, the citizen believed him and voted for the Brexit and nothing got better. Now the citizen does not believe in democracy in general. Trust is what has been lost. I can meet my MEP in the supermarket. I can write to him an email and he will reply personally. This is a non-issue.
        danielscrubs 1y ago
gtsop 1y ago
To which citizens are you talking to exactly? There are a few very rich citizens that always had control of the government and clrealy want this bill to pass. On the other hand there is a majority of other citizens which don't have the economic means, who are the victims of this bill, they never haf control of the government and don't want this bill to pass. Classless "citizens" don't exist. This is capitalism working as usual. Oh, and get in touch with reality please, there is no country where "citizens" don't have guns, it's just not all the citizens.
deleted 1y ago
[deleted]
ashoeafoot 1y ago
[dead]

bigyabai 1y ago

Dear citizens of the US: Please stop funding, allying with and protecting the manufacturers of surveillance tools. Stop exporting Palantir products and importing privacy-destroying devices from businesses like Greyshift and Cellebrite. Insist that the US government stop shielding hackers-for-hire like NSO Group who indiscriminately lease their products for discriminatory and illegal purposes. Stop defending "OEM" control that we have all known is a stand-in for federal steering since the Snowden leaks. Stop marketing E2EE while backdooring server and client hardware for "emergency" purposes. Do that, and you'll never be accused of hypocrisy again. Signed, a US citizen.

theodric 1y ago
Collective guilt projection is incredibly unfair. What is the average US citizen expected to do in this? I hereby promise not to buy any weapons systems from Palantir or use Cellebrite if I forget my phone's PIN code. Am I one of the good ones now?
- bigyabai 1y ago
  My point is to highlight the hypocrisy in HN casting stones from a glass house. I don't really believe you're beholden to fixing it (as I said, I'm a US citizen too). We just have to accept that the United States started this and is the only nation on Earth that can stop it. American surveillance technology is the role-model for abusive regimes and perfectly sensible governments around the world.
- baobun 1y ago
  A bunch of people pursuing or considering careers at those companies are hanging out here. Changing their minds should count for something.

sph 1y ago

> Start a revolution? You have no weapons. LOL. People nowadays don't start revolutions not because of weapons or lack thereof. It's because they're thoroughly entertained and fed; even the entire political circus is a sort of morbid reality show: people tune in to the news to shake their head in disgust at today's latest antics, and will do so tomorrow, because it's all panem et circenses for grown-ups. The Internet has become the greatest instrument of mass control ever created in the history of the world. It's done. As long people have their Doordash and Netflix, and are too busy working or scrolling instead of thinking deep thoughts, and reading anarchist philosophy, the kings has nothing to fear. Also, no need to single out the EU. The entire government-as-reality-TV is well and truly an American creation, and your three-letter agencies don't even have to pass any laws to collect information about its citizens. We're all in the same shit, my brother/sister.

gjsman-1000 1y ago
> and reading anarchist philosophy That's literally how we got here. People got a taste of unmitigated unprecedented freedom online for the last three decades, and found it so gross that they allowed things to swing the other way. Even one decade ago, the threat of SOPA/PIPA rallied the internet successfully. Just over a decade later, we're at the point of allowing age verification, for morality's sake, without hardly a peep. The cypherpunks are losing, hard, and honestly, deserve failure for how well their utopia turned out.
- bigyabai 1y ago
  How we literally "got here" was Section 230. You can easily stifle free speech by holding Facebook and X accountable for every single post ever made on their platforms. But that would capsize the American investment economy, so we have to protect them just a little bit. It creates a perverse, bipartisan incentive to export the most reprehensible opinions that still qualify as legal. European citizens (and soon, American ones too) are discovering that they never held the cards. When you ask your OEMs, cloud providers and DNS resolver who's side they're really on, it's not yours. You, the customer, hold no guillotine over their head.
- 1y ago

nickslaughter02 1y ago

> you will gradually lose control of your government That happened the moment European countries surrendered their sovereignty to EU.

gambiting 1y ago
Which of course never happened, as each member country retains full sovereignty in every possible way you can think of, which is actually fully enshrined in the way EU works.
- nickslaughter02 1y ago
  > Which of course never happened, as each member country retains full sovereignty in every possible way you can think of, which is actually fully enshrined in the way EU works. Which of course is false. > The principle was derived from an interpretation of the European Court of Justice, which ruled that European law has priority over any contravening national law, including the constitution of a member state itself. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primacy_of_European_Union_law https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primacy_of_European_Union_law
  - gambiting 1y ago
    And if you read literally one paragraph from the bit that you quoted: "The majority of national courts have generally recognized and accepted this principle, except for the part where European law outranks a member state's constitution. As a result, national constitutional courts have also reserved the right to review the conformity of EU law with national constitutional law" And guess why and how they are able to do that - that's right, by retaining full sovereignty of their own justice systems. Even obeying rulings of the ECHR is purely a matter of courtesy more than anything, as neither EU nor ECHR have any enforcement mechanism beyond withholding funding, as many EU member states have proven time and time and time again.
    - nickslaughter02 1y ago
      I'm looking forward to seeing this in practice when Chat Control passes.

JohnLocke4 1y ago

>You can't even organize a resistance because all channels of communication are monitored. One of the awful things about this proposed legislation is that what I quoted you saying is not true. Software like PGP is easy to use, and criminals already do. The government has absolutely no possibility of breaking RSA the way things are now, and as such scanning all messages will do nothing other than prove more definitively that criminals are still beyond their gavel. In reality, the only individuals who will get spied on are regular people who don't open their terminal just to send a text; exactly the people who should not be spied on in the first place. When the government realizes this invasive legislature is ineffective, they will probably crack down even harder. After all, what we are willing to accept from rulers has by the looks of it already increased dramatically. I wonder if it at some point it becomes illegal simply to posses encryption software on your personal devices, perhaps even possession of prime numbers that could theoretically be used in modern encryption. How far will the government go to take this illegal math from you?

hsbauauvhabzb 1y ago
Both apple and android are teeing their infra up to support deleting apps they don’t like. Windows is moving towards e2e attestation, and Mac is basically already there. Once that’s all done, you just need to enforce hardware manufacturers boot only into ‘trusted’ operating systems. No more Linux. No more unsigned execution. No more encryption.
- hellojesus 1y ago
  Plausible, but then people will use old computers and/or fab their own and/or import from adversarial governments and accept the risk of hardware backdoors.
- Juliate 1y ago
  Won’t happen. There is way too much existing deployed systems depending on alternative open source systems, and a mn incentive to use them to keep using old hardware. And way too strong a strategic incentive not to depend on US tech alone.

troupo 1y ago

> Start a revolution? You have no weapons. You can't even organize a resistance because all channels of communication are monitored. Unlike which country? The US I presume? I see very much a lack of any revolutions in the US, and the most resistance done in the past few decades was done by people with no weapons. I'd say most revolution-like movements of any kind in the US since the Civil War happened without weapons.

rfrey 1y ago
Even further, those who have traditionally been most vocal about second amendment rights are currently the biggest cheerleaders for the current authoritarian trend. Quite the plot twist.
- deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]

jansper39 1y ago

>you will gradually lose control of your government much like how the people of the UK already lost control of theirs. As a UK citizen, can you explain your reasoning here? We haven't implemented anything like the chat control proposal and while a few politicians have brought up similar ideas, there is a lot of pushback against it.

drnick1 1y ago
Age verification, while trivial to bypass (for now), has brought you closer to further privacy-invading restrictions. Next, VPNs will be attacked. Then it will be unsigned apps on "untrusted" operating systems.
- ycombigators 1y ago
  Anonymity is not privacy.
  - noncoml 1y ago
    VPN is not only for anonymity
    - ycombigators 1y ago
      I'm not sure what point you are making, but isn't the one I was responding to.
  - ang_cire 1y ago
    The mechanisms that attack one attack the other as well. The apparatuses which exist to de-anonymize communication also remove the ability to definitively keep the content of the communication private, and no government (UK or EU or US, etc) that has proposed a ChatControl-like scheme has ever used a method that did not allow them to do both. If a porn site checks my ID against a gov database, the gov now knows I went to that porn site. That is a loss of both anonymity and privacy.

chaosbolt 1y ago

It's already this dystopic, like any medium where people can talk freely gets eventually controlled by corrupt politicians etc. Anyways, the control of speech isn't only in surveillance, it's ingrained deeply in culture, taboos, education, etc. I have talked to religious people before, they all exhibited a certain characteristic, you could talk about somethings but you can't touch on other things, their mind won't accept it, so they bug and start saying nonsense. I've noticed the same thing with most people when it comes to certain subjects, you'd be talking to an educated person with a relatively high IQ and a mind that is capable to think critically in certain domains, yet once you point out something their mind has been trained to deem anti cultural (like for example who controls what), they turn into Agent Smith and they stop listening to reason. Anyways, this is HN so what I'm saying is that the control of the controllers is already absolute, it's been linearly increasing for years, they'd cause something then tighten their control of us for "our safety", until one day we get enough and some take out the guillotines and others the bald eagle etc. been happening for millenia, if we as a species were able to rebel on authority before s*it absolutely hit the fan, history would've been a lot cleaner.

dekken_ 1y ago

> you will gradually lose control of your government Already happened. That this keeps getting put forward is the evidence. Representative democracy, is not a democracy at all. Sic semper tyrannis.

TeMPOraL 1y ago

> Start a revolution? You have no weapons. (...) You have neither the pen nor the sword. We still have Euros. As long as enough companies and rich folk are more on our side than theirs, the government still has some incentive to serve us. I know, I know - money and politics, wealth and power, they go together at the high end. But there is the oft forgotten long tail, the rich and powerful at the scale of a city, a neighborhood, a niche market. Those tend to side with communities they live in, and in aggregate they still have plenty of pull with the rulers (which in stable times they use to block all kinds of potentially useful legislation, but still, good to have them come the hard times). Weapons won't matter all that much anyway, for several reasons: 1) Life, especially in the EU, is not like in an American action movie; 2) Citizens here may be significantly less armed, but the same is true of government officials, and even law enforcement is significantly less armed. It kind of evens out, unless military gets involved, but at that point all bets are off - no different than in the US. 3) Firearms have a habit of magically appearing in bulk the moment a revolution starts. When it happens, it's a good indicator you should GTFO somewhere far away, as you're being played by whoever is supplying the weapons to your side.

bfg_9k 1y ago
> 2) Citizens here may be significantly less armed, but the same is true of government officials, and even law enforcement is significantly less armed. It kind of evens out, unless military gets involved, but at that point all bets are off - no different than in the US. I don't think that's a correct comparison. If shit ever did hit the proverbial fan, you can bet that any US military walking around an American city would be constantly worried about getting a lead injection from any Tom, Dick or Harry who's got a firearm. I don't think the same can be said for the vast majority of European cities (assuming the military gets involved).
- JumpCrisscross 1y ago
  To say nothing of equipping a guerilla force in the event of a civil war. (Something nobody sane should fantasise about, by the way.)
- willy_k 1y ago

ycombigators 1y ago

"much like how the people of the UK already lost control of theirs" What are you on about, mate?

Popeyes 1y ago
Get your Bacofoil for this thread.

TacticalCoder 1y ago

[dead]

111111101101 1y ago

> Start a revolution? You have no weapons. Always this cope from Americans. A broad revolutionary movement will have sympathisers in the military and police. They can raid the governments armouries. The IRA became infamous for arms raids.

ohman876 1y ago

> If this gets pushed through, you will gradually lose control of your government A little bit off-topic but so called president of the EU is not elected, nor are the figures in so called EU commission :)

danielscrubs 1y ago
Brexit was an awful thing, BUT it will increase democracy for both parties. EU needs to be made more democratic or we need to severely limit its power, as its original intent, because the current show is just a farce.
- tpm 1y ago
  Brexit did not and will not 'increase democracy' in any way anywhere.
  - danielscrubs 1y ago
    It will, in time. You basically cut the hierarchy in half. A citizen can now meet their politician in the supermarket. The other parts necessary is transparency and democracy but those are on other orthogonal axis.
    - tpm 1y ago
      It won't, you haven't cut any hierarchy, that's not how the EU works (but the UK let themselves get disinformed about that for decades by certain Mr. Johnson and others). A citizen can meet the politician in the supermarket in the same way as before and it does not matter, because the politician lied to him, the citizen believed him and voted for the Brexit and nothing got better. Now the citizen does not believe in democracy in general. Trust is what has been lost. I can meet my MEP in the supermarket. I can write to him an email and he will reply personally. This is a non-issue.
      - danielscrubs 1y ago

gtsop 1y ago

To which citizens are you talking to exactly? There are a few very rich citizens that always had control of the government and clrealy want this bill to pass. On the other hand there is a majority of other citizens which don't have the economic means, who are the victims of this bill, they never haf control of the government and don't want this bill to pass. Classless "citizens" don't exist. This is capitalism working as usual. Oh, and get in touch with reality please, there is no country where "citizens" don't have guns, it's just not all the citizens.

deleted 1y ago

[deleted]

ashoeafoot 1y ago

[dead]