this post was submitted on 20 Sep 2024
297 points (94.6% liked)

politics

19099 readers
3529 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

“If somebody breaks into my house, they’re getting shot,” she said, laughing. “I probably should not have said that. My staff will deal with that later.”

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 266 points 1 month ago (3 children)

Some Republican is suddenly going to be against self defense. Just you watch.

[–] Myxomatosis 174 points 1 month ago (1 children)

“She needs to tone down her violent rhetoric.”

[–] [email protected] 93 points 1 month ago (3 children)

She was a DA. She’s probably carried since then.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 67 points 1 month ago (1 children)

One weird trick to get gun control laws Republicans don't want you to know!

[–] JusticeForPorygon 71 points 1 month ago (2 children)

To my understanding it worked with the Black Panthers

[–] [email protected] 24 points 1 month ago

By Republican God Reagan, no less.

[–] lepinkainen 9 points 1 month ago (2 children)

This is why EVERY queer person should carry a gun, openly if it’s legal in your region

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] FuglyDuck 183 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (3 children)

I mean, anyone who hasn't realized that she has 24/7 secret service protection and they're going to fucking shoot anyone whose an intruder to any of their protectees homes...

are kinda dumb.

[–] [email protected] 66 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

I mean, this is a pretty logical and understandable consequence of the right's call for political violence. I was pretty surprised the Pelosi intruder was able to do so much, tbh.

Edit: But, yes, people are dumb and disingenuous and will say that they should be able to kill an intruder on their property without question and then turn around and say that Harris' detail should not be allowed to do so.

[–] jordanlund 72 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Pelosi's attacker got as far as he did because Pelosi's protection was with her, and she wasn't home, which let Paul take the brunt of the attack.

[–] [email protected] 18 points 1 month ago (1 children)

One would think they would leave at least one agent with him.

[–] jordanlund 12 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

You'd think, right? Well NOW he does, I bet...

[–] [email protected] 13 points 1 month ago

Oh yeah. It still surprised me, though.

[–] snausagesinablanket 36 points 1 month ago (1 children)

are kinda dumb.

Basically anyone in the GOP.

[–] FuglyDuck 9 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (4 children)

And the gun control single issue voters- at least a few.

I don’t think most people realize just how un-hesitant a secret service on protection detail will be to shoot an unknown intruder.

Like. That’s not a Harris thing. That’s just their job. Which is why the guy that saw a rifle more or less just started blasting. (Maybe not “just”… I assume they assessed range and stuff. A pistol at 200 yards is almost useless even if you do hit what you’re aiming at.)

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] rayyy 8 points 1 month ago

kinda dumb.

You really think the cult isn't that dumb? Any bets that one of them will try it? Of course MAGA would claim it was her fault in any circumstance.

[–] [email protected] 109 points 1 month ago (3 children)

Reminds me of that West Wing episode where he "accidentally" makes an offensive gun analogy comment; Harris doesn't really alienate any supporters here, and she appeals to the undecided gun crowd voters. As a bonus, she's "telling it like it is" for folks who are self-described as being "fed up with PC culture."

[–] Archer 43 points 1 month ago (2 children)

The West Wing looks so fucking anachronistic now

[–] billiam0202 60 points 1 month ago (5 children)

It was then, too.

The Republicans as portrayed in The West Wing were far more sane than even the GOP at the time. Remember, the show first aired shortly after the GOP impeached Clinton for a blowjob because they couldn't find any evidence of impropriety in the Whitewater deal.

[–] InverseParallax 22 points 1 month ago

Yeah but Republicans weren't all properly cartoonishly evil at that point, we had senators like McCain and others, and if you started to talk about how the nazis were actually just misunderstood they'd kick your ass out of the party.

[–] [email protected] 19 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (2 children)

I can't even make myself rewatch it because the "scandals" that are at the core of most episodes are so mundane and plebian it just descends into a farce.

Hell, even the many scenes when they treat the Whitehouse as a kind of civic holy ground just don't work now. I just can't buy it after 4 years of that lunatic sitting behind the resolute desk.

[–] billiam0202 15 points 1 month ago

Time has changed the show from "an idealized depiction of a Democratic White House" to "an idealized depiction of a functioning government not hampered by an irrational party comprised of insane ideologues and traitors."

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 11 points 1 month ago

He wasn't impeached for a blowjob. He was impeached for perjuring himself while the defendant in a sexual harassment inquiry. The blowjob is just the thing he lied about.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 19 points 1 month ago

Compared to how DC runs these days, West Wing is up there with Harry Potter on the Fantasy scale.

[–] MirthfulAlembic 20 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Your bonus point is depressingly significant. The number of people I've heard say something like, "I don't like x, y, z about Trump, but I like that he speaks his mind and tells it like it is in his opinion" drives me crazy. When did it become admirable to be an unfiltered boor?

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 98 points 1 month ago (2 children)

I mean it's true, if you bust into the VP's house I'd expect nothing less

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] ATDA 91 points 1 month ago (4 children)

When I think about it

Instead of a debate let's go to a range and do a little target shooting.

Watching Trump fumble around, hit nothing, getting smoked by a woman.

Sounds like a lot of fucking fun to watch.

Oh wait we already saw that lolololol.

[–] jordanlund 62 points 1 month ago (7 children)

As a convicted felon, Trump can't have a gun. ;)

[–] [email protected] 19 points 1 month ago (1 children)

He can't even have bullets on his person

So for that like .1ms where he was being "hit" by that bullet were technically him breaking the law

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 month ago (1 children)

"I bet your tiny hands couldn't even hold an ar15"

No fucking way any sane person would wanna be at a gun range with him tho

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] TehWorld 9 points 1 month ago

I’d bet money that DonOld has never actually loaded a gun. If he’s ever actually shot one it was probably handed to him with the safety off and a lot of prayer.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] NatakuNox 46 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

These idiots filmed themselves trying to overthrow the government. They'll taking this as a dare/challenge

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 42 points 1 month ago

And then you get shot when it turns out to be the police raiding your home unannounced because they got the address wrong again.

[–] taiyang 40 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I like this for some reason. Maybe even more if she slipped and said "fuckin' shot" maybe because it's Oprah.

Weird that the whole "I probably shouldn't say that" is a very Trump like thing to say, but those types of comments have a lot of power with people so more power to her.

[–] lennybird 13 points 1 month ago (7 children)

It was an authentic moment and people love that. I watched it live and was like dayum.

I've done a shit ton of research and writing on the topic of firearm regulation. I grew up with them as well. I am absolutely for very strict firearm regulation... However: I think it's time democrats pivot on this to root causes: education, Healthcare, and societal stressors. The electorate just isn't there yet, and it will probably take another 2 decades at least before the boomers die off and any movement can be made.

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] shalafi 25 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (4 children)

Yes, if you come in my home forcefully, I'll do my best to kill you. That is a line one does not cross, especially not with my wife and children in the house. Bullshit outside is a call to 911, see what happens.

Sure, maybe it's some drunk or kid at the wrong home. That's why you take a breath and identify the target and situation. If you're too fucking panicky to do that, give up your weapons, you do not deserve them.

Gun laws are mostly counter-productive and racist, but I'd go for a simple "use of force" test before one's initial purchase. If you watch GunTubers, you'll get sane takes, often straight legal advice from lawyers. If you talk to individuals, Jesus, what these people think is lawful and moral... And if you can't be arsed to do your fucking homework before bringing death into the equation, you are not fit to own or handle a weapon.

And don't fuck with me on this unless you've suffered a home invasion. Ever had hoods break in and rob you at knife point on Christmas Eve? Ever had a bear wander in your home on Christmas Eve? (Wow, now that I say that out loud... weird. Maybe I should not stay home on the 24th. OK, the wolf hybrid cruised in one summer night, but I knew him. Still got me to draw. 🙄)

[–] TommySoda 13 points 1 month ago (1 children)

These downvotes seem a little excessive. You're making some good points about guns and how people should handle them.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] InverseParallax 11 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I'm close on this.

I'm a responsible gun owner, but there are a LOT of crazy ammosexuals out there who aren't safe to let carry.

If someone tries to enter your house though, that's a red line.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] TechLich 11 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I feel like this a cultural thing because that sounds wild to me.

The penalty for burglary where I am is not death, nor am I a judge or executioner.

We've been broken into a lot and it's usually just some poor asshole who wants to steal things to buy meth. It's horrible and scary and feels like a massive violation but shooting someone in that scenario just feels like straight up murder.

[–] FrostyTheDoo 12 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

When someone breaks into your home you don't have much of an opportunity to figure out why. Many times the reason is not to steal things and buy meth. Sometimes it's to hurt, rape, or kidnap someone. Why take that chance?

You might be picturing someone slowly walking up and executing a pleading, weaponless burglar in cold blood. In reality these things happen with mere seconds to make a decision about the safety of you and your family. Again, Why take the chance?

If you're breaking into a house, getting shot is a calculated risk you have chosen to take. If it happens, it's only your fault. You had the choice to not put yourself or anyone else in harm's way, and you chose the other option.

[–] friend_of_satan 8 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

When someone breaks into your home you don't have much of an opportunity to figure out why.

My thoughts exactly. "In Cold Blood" by Truman Capote is a true story about burglars who came to steal and ended up murdering a whole family. Awful thing to experience. Great book though.

[–] WoodScientist 7 points 1 month ago (10 children)

The bigger problem is that people who buy guns for home defense are acting emotionally, not logically. The cold hard statistical truth is that if you own a firearm, it is most likely to be used by yourself or one of your family members to commit suicide, or to be the cause of a fatal accident, than it is to be used in self defense.

People have this deeply flawed belief about suicide that if someone wants to do it, they'll find a way. But that isn't how suicide actually works. Most actual suicides are spur-of-the moment things. And giving someone access, in their, home, to a quick and usually painless method of ending their own life serves to massively increase the risk of suicide. Everyone has bad days. Everyone who lives long enough and isn't a psychopath will experience deep sorrow. In a drunken sorrow on the night after a bad breakup or the death of a close relative? It doesn't take much for people to be vulnerable to the call of the void.

Yes, break-ins are scary. But the truth is, most thieves try NOT to break in when someone is home. And home invasions for rape, murder, or kidnapping are even rarer. There are a lot of scary things in this world, but you shouldn't let that fear control your behavior. Rabies is a damn terrible thing, but it would be incredibly irrational to avoid going on a hike just due the risk of encountering a rabid wild animal.

In the US at least, if you own a gun, it is far, far likelier that that weapon will be used to end your life or life of one of your family members than it will end be used in self defense.

This is why I do not own a firearm. Yes, home invasions are terrifying. But if you own a weapon for the sake of home defense, you are letting your emotions and fear control your life. The simple statistical fact is that, on the net, buying a gun lowers your average expected lifespan.

load more comments (10 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Nastybutler 21 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Deranged MAGA nuts: Challenge accepted!

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Worstdriver 17 points 1 month ago

Well, better than the time someone broke into the home of the Canadian Prime Minister (Jean Chretien at the time) and his wife held off the intruder with a soapstone carving...

[–] CaptainSpaceman 16 points 1 month ago

Mine too, Madamme. Mine too

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 month ago

What are we going to do with all those Louisville Sluggers, sitting in the hallway closet?

[–] WoahWoah 8 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

I hate to say it, but in America right now, Harris leaning into a quasi-pro gun stance is probably the right move. Something like 75% of the country are against a hand gun ban (which is the type of gun used in like 97% of murders), over 70% say the 2nd amendment guarantees the right to own guns, a large majority are against an all-rifle ban, and a simple majority are against an assault-rifle style ban.

Until the gun culture in America changes, and with presidential elections always being so close, moving away from the anti-gun position just makes obvious political sense, unfortunately.

load more comments
view more: next ›