- cross-posted to:
- memes@lemmy.ml
- memes@lemmy.ml
- memes@lemmy.ml
- cross-posted to:
- memes@lemmy.ml
- memes@lemmy.ml
- memes@lemmy.ml
You must log in or register to comment.
The
ICEGestapo agents, more likely.If it comes to the point where the government is so bad that civilians have to fight against it, then the soldiers and police officers should join them.
That would be nice, wouldn’t it ? unfortunately cops are lawful evil, meaning they gave allegiance to DAS KAPITAL
Most will not. Look at history.
I said “should”
Yea, so here’s the thing bud, those guys are there to protect the capital owners… Sorry. Pete’s right about their inclusion however not accepting if they fail to stand down then they should go too.
If those soldiers and cops are there solely at the behest of s despot like the current one in office then they are expendable
The 2nd amendment LITERALY states it to use against the gov…
No it doesn’t. The role of the militias were to be called up to put down insurrection and slave revolts.
Ahem…
“A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”
Where, exactly?
I know reading context isn’t easy for Americans so let me, a foreigner, explain it to you.
That document was written about 10 years after the Americans launched an armed insurrection against their government so they could pay less taxes and due to a grievance about parliamentary representation. In this context when they write about a well regulated Militia being necessary to the security of a “free State,” they actually imply that the security guarantee is against a tyrannical state of which they had recently been at war with. They understood that the free state (for white landlords) was precarious and could change so they believed that the hedge against that was local participatory militias. To note here is a “well regulated militia” in this era implies the adoption of military rank and file and internal regulations, not governmental imposed regulations on the existence of the militia or the weaponry itself.
I know reading is very hard. I hope with practice you may someday be able to read and understand context. It takes a lot of effort to become literate. Good luck on your journey.
Good explanation. Really no need for the insults though.
Nah, atp Americans that don’t understand their own constitution need to have snark thrown at them.
Being that fucking stupid is costing people their lives.
Truth hurts sometimes
Ahem…
They kinda asked for it.
You are correct, but implying something is not the same as literally stating something
so they could pay less taxes and due to a grievance about parliamentary representation
They did primarily because they wanted to expand their settler colonies further into native lands while the British government had tried restricting settler expansion.
The “free state” was never about preventing oppression of the citizens or launching an insurrection against the state. I don’t know where this bizzare view comes from, since the constitution literally defines treason against the state to be punishable by death.
In this context when they write about a well regulated Militia being necessary to the security of a “free State,” they actually imply that the security guarantee is against a tyrannical state of which they had recently been at war with.
No, it doesn’t. Read Article 8, as it describes what the militia’s purpose is. At the time “the people” meant “the states”, as each state was to be secure in it’s own abilities and authorities to manage it’s militias. The purpose was to put down insurrections and slave revolts.
Remember, also, that to be “in the militia”, you were also reporting for regular muster and inspections. By the government.
Considering there are only 7 articles to the constitution I assume you mean Article 1 Section 8 which defines the ability of the federal government to call forth a militia but does not itself impose any substantive limits on the militias beyond that? Is that the article you are referring to? Maybe you should re-read it. Well regulated language is conceptually distinct from congress’s power defined in A1 § 8 to organize and discipline a militia once its activated. The text also imposes no federal prohibition on state or unorganized militias from setting membership or arms. If it isn’t prohibited by the language of the document, it is allowed.
Yes, sorry… the militia clause, as its known
The purpose of the militia is to put down insurrection, not to engage in it.
The word “regulated” has had only one actual meaning… the same as it means to regulate interstate commerce.
And only a couple of years later, the militia acts passed.
At the time “the people” meant “the states”
Please take a government class before continuing with your understanding of the Constitution
Please read why the 14th amendment extended the bill of rights to apply to people…
That’s not what the 14th amendment does
The 14th provides birthright citizenship, outlines that states won’t imprison people without due process, covers congressional proportionality, and makes insurrection/treason cause for not being eligible for office
Seriously, take a constitutionality class, you need it
I pray you actually read what people point you too:
No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law
Where does ICE fall in this paradigm?
Target practice.
He thinks he’s talking to conservatives, playing on their “thin blue line” sympathies. But like every other rank-and-file Democrat, he has failed to read the fucking room. The right-wing in America showed us on January 6th 2021 that their support of law enforcement is purely conditional, and will be revoked the minute they don’t get their way. And the Left? We always hated cops.
His message reached zero people.
It took me a moment to realize it was about AR as in AR-15 the gun and not augmented reality
It would be cool to see an arrow with a pig emoji pointing at police out of uniform.
It also involves the fantasy that you and your freedom buddies will survive a serious encounter with US armed forces because you have camos and tactical boots.
Well, based on the average marksmanship displayed by most American shooters, those cops and soldiers can probably expect to go about their business with absolute safety.
Their fantasy is specifically a David Koresh moment where the ATF and FBI come at them for fucking children.
Had a different ring to it in 2018
I think this is directed at the right
Leftists with guns: this is fine
Yeah no shit buddy. It’s come to that point. I like you Pete, but don’t bury your head in the sand on this one. American soldiers defend fascism.
I like you Pete
Why, though? He’s a Neoliberal proponent of Reaganomics Lite and McKinsey grad (but I repeat myself) who keeps failing upwards.
Nah, every time pete pops up it’s something stupid that makes me like him less and less.
They’re talking about how this tweet is from 2018. Different situation then.
Maybe because he would be a fairly normal right wing figure in another country?
2018 was a different time
No, we knew it was fascism then too.
No it wasn’t. Hell, it was even 2 years into the first Trump term.
Do you think he would say anything different now?
I think his audience has shifted
In what ways?
What has Pete done to make you believe he is going after an audience that would disagree with this statement and/or that he would now disagree with this statement?
Your initial comment was that “2018 was a different time” I’m trying to understand what you think has changed so drastically since then.
I think a lot of people stopped listening to the rad libs like Maddow and became disaffected from the Democrats since then. those folks are (at least around me) engaging in more radical acts of resistance than the marching-and-shouting that dominated the public actions of that time. so while buttegieg probably hasn’t shifted much, and might think he’s still talking to those same people, many of them are no longer listening.
deleted by creator
Of course this is what it means. The people who wrote down this existing right had done the same to their equivalents. It’s not a fantasy.
