Most leftists don’t think all guns are always bad so I’m not sure what value they’re supposedly turning on here. Pretty sure the prevailing complaint on the left is about how easy it is to acquire a firearm, not that people have them.
I support people’s right to own weapons but it should be a lot harder to purchase and there should be MUCH greater punishments if the weapon you own is used in a shooting (I’m thinking parents of school shooters who poorly secured their guns)
These people don’t understand nuance. If you’re against general unrestricted availability of guns, but are not against all availability of guns, you’ve already lost them, they’ll label you as “anti-gun nut” and then be shocked if you say you own a gun, call you “out” on turning on your own convictions.
i dont think that comment is in reference to leftists turning on an antigun stance but right wing media turning on their hardline 2nd amendment stance to vilify them for it
In addition to your last sentence, the most stolen item is firearms. If it isn’t secured properly, what happens with it should be on you, even if it’s stolen. If it was secured properly and they still got to it, like breaking open a secure gun safe (not a cheap Walmart one), what happens with it after should not be your fault.
I read that as Hasan questioning the MAGAt if there was any value rightoids won’t forfeit since they are stereotypically very 2A and now this guy’s positing as if owning guns to guard against a tyrannical government is bad.
If he was trying to criticize leftists or liberals, why’d he choose a right wing source of the news to react to?
To be fair, I don’t really watch Hasan, so it’s possible my interpretation is completely wrong as clarified in one of his streams.
The thing about reactionaries is that they think rules are for other people. It’s only hypocritical if one takes them at their word, but they only care about winning points in arguments. They’ll argue any position if they can twist it into sounding reasonable, and they’ll steal the language of liberation from the left to do so.
Their singular principle is that entrenched power must defend itself, because they know benefits them directly. They sincerely don’t care about the second amendment; they don’t think it applies to everyone, only “real” Americans who look and act like white supremacists.
In my opinion, there should be mandatory training and testing to check that you know how to store and operate your firearm properly. You should also be required to own a secure place to store it.
The training and testing should be paid for by taxes though (at least the first time) so poor people aren’t restricted from gun ownership.
Basically, though I believe that does not require you to be certified for the gun you’re purchasing. It just requires general knowledge. I think it should go further.
Also, that is not a federal requirement to purchase a firearm. It’s only required in some jurisdictions.
Ideally, it should also require fairly frequent practice. This rule would be hard to enforce though.
All guns work the same. Only different is the action (how to load the gun) and there are only a few subcategories. How other people vote and decide to run there town is out of our hands. This idea that guns are hard to use is quite the contrary they are designed for anybody to use that’s why they are so deadly. Less then 1% of legal gun owners do a crime with there legally owned guns. USA doesn’t have a gun issue we have a criminal and mental health issue. Criminals do not follow any guns laws causing regular citizens to be outgunned. And we should ask ourselves what is going on in society that is causing people to shoot themselves? But you’re proving my point you just want the rules to be your way. How each state and country decide there laws is what true democracy stands for.
Yeah, militaries spend time training with specific weapons just for fun…
Sure, every gun uses gunpowder to fire a round. The methods they handle this can be fairly different, though it isn’t incredibly important. The important thing is, when it comes time to use it, that you’re familiar with the gun you have. If you aren’t then you’ll be slower. You also need to know how to clean it, and how the safety mechanism work (whether there is a safety switch, etc), and where it is on your gun.
Owning one should be a responsibity. If you aren’t ready to operate it then you don’t need to own one. Best case, if you need it you’ll be too slow and useless to be able to. Worst case, it’s stolen and used to commit a crime, and this isn’t unlikely. Firearms are, IIRC, the most frequently stolen item.
Most leftists don’t think all guns are always bad so I’m not sure what value they’re supposedly turning on here. Pretty sure the prevailing complaint on the left is about how easy it is to acquire a firearm, not that people have them.
I support people’s right to own weapons but it should be a lot harder to purchase and there should be MUCH greater punishments if the weapon you own is used in a shooting (I’m thinking parents of school shooters who poorly secured their guns)
These people don’t understand nuance. If you’re against general unrestricted availability of guns, but are not against all availability of guns, you’ve already lost them, they’ll label you as “anti-gun nut” and then be shocked if you say you own a gun, call you “out” on turning on your own convictions.
i dont think that comment is in reference to leftists turning on an antigun stance but right wing media turning on their hardline 2nd amendment stance to vilify them for it
Ohhh, I guess I interpreted the quoted tweet as positive
It helps to have the context of the views of the speak. Hasanabi is a left guy (I had to double check this).
I knew Hasan was left but not that the quoted tweet was a conservative reporter complaining about it
In addition to your last sentence, the most stolen item is firearms. If it isn’t secured properly, what happens with it should be on you, even if it’s stolen. If it was secured properly and they still got to it, like breaking open a secure gun safe (not a cheap Walmart one), what happens with it after should not be your fault.
Yeah, that’s absolutely what I mean. If your kid takes your gun to school, you did a shit job securing it
I read that as Hasan questioning the MAGAt if there was any value rightoids won’t forfeit since they are stereotypically very 2A and now this guy’s positing as if owning guns to guard against a tyrannical government is bad.
If he was trying to criticize leftists or liberals, why’d he choose a right wing source of the news to react to?
To be fair, I don’t really watch Hasan, so it’s possible my interpretation is completely wrong as clarified in one of his streams.
Yeah, that’s how I read it too.
The thing about reactionaries is that they think rules are for other people. It’s only hypocritical if one takes them at their word, but they only care about winning points in arguments. They’ll argue any position if they can twist it into sounding reasonable, and they’ll steal the language of liberation from the left to do so.
Their singular principle is that entrenched power must defend itself, because they know benefits them directly. They sincerely don’t care about the second amendment; they don’t think it applies to everyone, only “real” Americans who look and act like white supremacists.
One of my fears is if I try to buy a gun, someone will actually let me.
How could you make it harder? Imagine if it was hard for all the new gun owners in Minnesota? I’m guessing you just want to make the rules?
In my opinion, there should be mandatory training and testing to check that you know how to store and operate your firearm properly. You should also be required to own a secure place to store it.
The training and testing should be paid for by taxes though (at least the first time) so poor people aren’t restricted from gun ownership.
I believe that’s called the Firearm Safety Certificate lol
Basically, though I believe that does not require you to be certified for the gun you’re purchasing. It just requires general knowledge. I think it should go further.
Also, that is not a federal requirement to purchase a firearm. It’s only required in some jurisdictions.
Ideally, it should also require fairly frequent practice. This rule would be hard to enforce though.
All guns work the same. Only different is the action (how to load the gun) and there are only a few subcategories. How other people vote and decide to run there town is out of our hands. This idea that guns are hard to use is quite the contrary they are designed for anybody to use that’s why they are so deadly. Less then 1% of legal gun owners do a crime with there legally owned guns. USA doesn’t have a gun issue we have a criminal and mental health issue. Criminals do not follow any guns laws causing regular citizens to be outgunned. And we should ask ourselves what is going on in society that is causing people to shoot themselves? But you’re proving my point you just want the rules to be your way. How each state and country decide there laws is what true democracy stands for.
Yeah, militaries spend time training with specific weapons just for fun…
Sure, every gun uses gunpowder to fire a round. The methods they handle this can be fairly different, though it isn’t incredibly important. The important thing is, when it comes time to use it, that you’re familiar with the gun you have. If you aren’t then you’ll be slower. You also need to know how to clean it, and how the safety mechanism work (whether there is a safety switch, etc), and where it is on your gun.
Owning one should be a responsibity. If you aren’t ready to operate it then you don’t need to own one. Best case, if you need it you’ll be too slow and useless to be able to. Worst case, it’s stolen and used to commit a crime, and this isn’t unlikely. Firearms are, IIRC, the most frequently stolen item.
I’m obviously talking about states with weak gun laws, not the people in the photo. Minnesota’s firearm regulations are fine.
Like which states?