←back to thread

628 points nodea2345 | 4 comments | | HN request time: 0.017s | source
Show context
nvahalik ◴[] 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 #
cwkoss ◴[] No.21128793[source]
I think it is unfortunate that so many Americans don't know about the history of the Black Panthers. In US public school system, we are taught that the Civil Rights Act was won through peaceful marching - this is not the whole story.

Black Panthers carried guns to protect protests, and having guns created a situation where cops could not rush in and beat dissent into submission. There is a strong argument that without the second amendment, the Civil Rights Act would not have been passed, and we would still be living in an institutionally segregated society.

I don't own a gun and don't feel I need one because I'm a privileged urban white. Gun control has historically been used as a tool to disarm Black Americans: the NRA supported gun control in response to the Black Panthers! (https://www.history.com/news/black-panthers-gun-control-nra-...)

Any discussion of gun control in America must account for the self-defense rights of Americans who do not have adequate protection from the police.

replies(6): >>21129340 #>>21129509 #>>21129684 #>>21130401 #>>21131110 #>>21131185 #
jfim ◴[] No.21129509[source]
> Any discussion of gun control in America must account for the self-defense rights of Americans who do not have adequate protection from the police.

Interestingly, that would be most of them, with the supreme court ruling that the police does not have a constitutional duty to protect a person from harm.

https://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/28/politics/justices-rule-po...

replies(1): >>21130853 #
ridewinter ◴[] No.21130853[source]
Owning a gun makes it 2-3x more likely someone in your family will die by a gun. So it makes you less safe, not more. https://slate.com/technology/2015/01/good-guy-with-a-gun-myt...

And it definitely makes it less safe for the rest of us in society.

replies(3): >>21130958 #>>21130997 #>>21131037 #
1. cwkoss ◴[] No.21130958[source]
correlation != causality

If someone has threatened you with a gun or you live in an area with increased gun violence, I would expect that greatly increases the chances that you'd want to acquire your own. This cohort would already be at a much higher risk of gun death before they owned a gun as well.

There has never been a placebo controlled double blind study on gun ownership. Probably never will be because of ethical concerns.

It probably does increase risk, but I expect the effect size is much lower than 2-3x.

replies(1): >>21132156 #
2. mav3rick ◴[] No.21132156[source]
How about no one has guns ?
replies(1): >>21132268 #
3. cwkoss ◴[] No.21132268[source]
How about we fund mental healthcare nationally, reduce wealth inequality, and end racial disparity in policing first?

Until then, an attempt to ban all guns is not only a politically infeasible waste of energy, but also seems like a racist attack on the self-defense rights of the disempowered.

replies(1): >>21132919 #
4. mav3rick ◴[] No.21132919{3}[source]
"What about...". There are mass shootings in schools every year. How about we solve the problems you mentioned and the others in parallel. US spends enough on military budget , they can cut back and solve these. The disempowered don't need "white knights", they are the ones often dying to gun violence.