PoliticalAgitator @ PoliticalAgitator @lemmy.world

Posts

0

Comments

505

Joined

2 yr. ago

Grenades sales wouldn't be as profitable to gun manufacturers as handguns and rifles, which is why its rare to see "grenades should he covered by the second amendment" but common to see "the answer to all these guns is even more guns".

It's no different to the days when tobacco companies claimed smoking was actually good for lung conditions, knowing full well that it wasn't.

The number of gun owners who want to shoot someone is likely much higher than the number of gun owners who genuinely fear for their life when someone stops in their driveway but both of them will say "I feared for my life" when questioned.

Not a requirement to own or use a gun, at the insistence of "responsible gun owners" who demand that responsibility remains 100% optional.

Doesn't matter, shot gun.

He can shoot at people because he was sold a gun and anyone who has a gun can shoot at anybody they decide. What we're actually waiting to learn is "Will this former responsible gun owner get away with shooting at people?".

If the answer is "yes" then other gun owners are going to do the same thing because they want to shoot at people.

If the answer is "no because he didn't have a 'no trespassing' sign" then gun owners are going to buy "no trespassing" signs and then shoot at people, because they want to shoot at people.

The "I feared for my life" rhetoric is just an excuse to shoot people, borrowed from police when they wanted to shoot people. You don't have to politely believe them just because they said it.

Google figured out that number internally before development on it even started. Whatever the figure is, they've deemed it a profitable trade.

"What if instead of convincing gullible people to buy healing crystals, magic water and psychic services, we used those techniques to make them hate minorities?".

I’d say having these groups coordinate in a platform where government officials are able to gain easy access is better than banning them and forcing them to move to more secure methods of communication

It's not, because extremism spreads like herpes. Making these platforms more accessible to government officials also makes them more accessible to vulnerable, stupid people -- and there's 1000 of them for every 1 fed who wants to stop a terrorist attack.

Also, the people at the core of these groups are absolutely aware of secure communication. The Facebook page might say "Rally for Freedom, 2A welcome" but behind that curtain, human dogshit are brainstorming things like "how can we get counter protesters killed".

As dumb as most of the far-right is, very few are stupid enough to plan crimes and conspiracies on Facebook.

They don't care if it never works because the true goal is to convert public funds into private profits.

I've literally opted for.homelessness over Centrelink payments

Then you're dumb as fuck.

Why would for-profit media companies do something like that? It's dangerous, expensive and brings in less money than clickbait about celebrities.

Hurry, you've got to make up a lot of ground to become king of the simps. His ego is a black hole capable of absorbing infinite amounts of fawning, baseless adoration. Hell, he completely reinvented himself the day he worked out that right-wing reactionaries set a lower bar.

Fuck off.

Shh. If there's one thing "responsible gun owners" can't stand, it's being held responsible.

Neoliberals can't help but demand constant growth, even in class warfare.

It goes to whomever has simped the hardest for him on social media.

I'm not sure if this is a hypothesis with any level of acceptance

Unless an actual record is found describing what they were used for, it's all just guesses anyway.

I genuinely can't tell if you're autistic, have abysmal reading comprehension or are pretending to be stupid but either way, I'm not engaging further.

Oh, I get it now. You just find tiny threads and pull them as melodramatically as you can. It's a hallmark of manipulative partners and untreated BPD that I should he seen sooner.

Minor criticism is turned into "this person must be a troll trying to bait us into anger" and even something you yourself described as "defending indirectly" became "vehemently defending" and of course I was in a "frenzied rage", probably because I used the word "fuck".

Then if that doesn't work, resort to the usual lazy tricks. Take figurative speech literally, accuse people of logical fallacies that don't apply, do a little bit of mind reading and then declare yourself the winner.

If I was actually a troll, I couldn't have asked for a better reaction. You're the worst ambassador for Linux I've ever seen.