←back to thread

Protester shot in chest by live police round during Hong Kong protests

(www.reddit.com)
628 points nodea2345 | 5 comments | 01 Oct 19 11:19 UTC | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
nvahalik ◴[01 Oct 19 13:30 UTC] No.21125093[source]▶
> Imagine if the US suddenly had a dictator

This is why we have the second amendment. And the constitution as the thing to which office-holders swear allegiance to rather than to "the party" or "the president".

replies(26): >>21125127 #>>21125139 #>>21125892 #>>21126027 #>>21126073 #>>21126084 #>>21126204 #>>21126397 #>>21126398 #>>21126638 #>>21126890 #>>21126892 #>>21127286 #>>21127513 #>>21127874 #>>21127880 #>>21128227 #>>21128793 #>>21129412 #>>21129418 #>>21129526 #>>21129658 #>>21130063 #>>21130220 #>>21131181 #>>21131653 #
swarnie_[dead post] ◴[01 Oct 19 13:34 UTC] No.21125127[source]▶
Non-American here, i never really understood your second amendment or how you cling to it in the modern age.

What are a couple of rednecks with assault rifles (which arguably they shouldn't be able to purchase anyway) going to do against semi-autonomy kill droids being flown from a bunker in the desert?

JumpCrisscross ◴[01 Oct 19 13:42 UTC] No.21125217[source]▶
> What are a couple of rednecks with assault rifles (which arguably they shouldn't be able to purchase anyway) going to do against semi-autonomy kill droids being flown from a bunker in the desert?

The point is to increase the cost of violence against the population. The Swiss bunker / guerrilla strategy.

Also, there is no reason to suspect asymmetric vectors like autonomous drone armies would accrue solely to state actors.

replies(2): >>21125824 #>>21125883 #
1. cjslep ◴[01 Oct 19 14:49 UTC] No.21125883[source]▶
> The Swiss bunker / guerrilla strategy.

As an American living in Switzerland, this is not a fair comparison. The Swiss strategy involves mandatory service (with the backing of the government), short and long term preparations against an outside invading force (with the backing of the government), highly regulated gun ownership (with the backing of the government). It's always wielded with the backing of the government against an outside force.

In stark contrast, the U.S. mindset around gun ownership has always been about wielding the weapons against the government itself. Instead, what this effectively means is that this will be an easily hijacked ideal if, in our politically charged era, portions of the government are viewed as "illegitimate" and one part of the government backs a coup with gun-toting civilians against "the government" (the part not liked).

replies(2): >>21126015 #>>21126103 #
2. jbattle ◴[01 Oct 19 15:00 UTC] No.21126015[source]▶
So the Swiss have ... a well-regulated militia? Wish we had thought of that!
replies(1): >>21126244 #
3. JumpCrisscross ◴[01 Oct 19 15:05 UTC] No.21126103[source]▶
> As an American living in Switzerland, this is not a fair comparison

As a Swiss American, I agree. Today’s Second Amendment debate is perverted.

My argument was to the point of the Second Amendment, its intent. America is currently on an extreme end of the gun-debate spectrum.

4. Andrex ◴[01 Oct 19 15:15 UTC] No.21126244[source]▶
It's almost like that language was inserted into the Constitution for some explicit purpose, but then someone (the Supreme Court) forgot about that along the way...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/District_of_Columbia_v._Heller

I think it's weird how American gun advocates didn't get upset when SCOTUS took some white-out to the amendment they claim to hold so sacred.

replies(1): >>21127320 #
5. jki275 ◴[01 Oct 19 16:28 UTC] No.21127320{3}[source]▶
Except that's not at all what happened. The plain language of the 2nd amendment is quite clearly and accurately explained by Scalia in Heller. He took no "white out" to it, he explained what anyone without a political agenda has always known the 2nd amendment meant.