Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Protester shot in chest by live police round during Hong Kong protests

reddit.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 957 posts

Re: Protester shot in chest by live police round during Hong Kong protests

#141

Post by MichaelApproved »

empath75 wrote: post #74
mc32 wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s uncertain what the eventual outcome would be, but one thing is for sure, it would increase the threshold before the tanks rolled in.

If they were armed this would have been over a long time ago. China would have gone in with tanks and the army, or even air strikes. Once you take up arms against the government that’s not a protest, that’s a civil war.

Putting aside how insane air strikes would be in Hong Kong, you’d probably see more Guerrilla warfare, if the citizens were armed.

Re: Protester shot in chest by live police round during Hong Kong protests

#142

Post by exabrial »

mc32 wrote: post #38
kristiandupont wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If HK'ers had a similar right to carry guns, do you honestly believe that they would be any better off right now?

It’s uncertain what the eventual outcome would be, but one thing is for sure, it would increase the threshold before the tanks rolled in.

I don't think the Hong Kong government would allow the PLA to invade.

Re: Protester shot in chest by live police round during Hong Kong protests

#143

Post by radmarshallb »

ptero wrote: post #125
vnchr wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The police are allowed to shoot someone in the leg. Lethal force is not the only option with a firearm.

Different police units are trained for different rules. Somewhere it is a verbal warning, warning shot, shot in the leg, shot to kill. Sometimes it is just a verbal warning and a shot to kill. Not defending the police in this specific case (I do not know the details), but blaming an officer for following the sequence he has been trained for is misplacing the blame. My 2c.

I highly doubt any officers anywhere are trained to fire a warning shot, much less a precise disabling shot in the leg. When you fire your weapon, it is with the intent to kill.

Re: Protester shot in chest by live police round during Hong Kong protests

#144

Post by Mikeb85 »

thaumasiotes wrote: post #78
orf wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You’d think that an armed protest group would mean that the government reacts with _less_ force? Rather than simply deploying an appropriate amount of force to stop them? Because the simple fact is that the government will win in the game of “who has more guns and power”, just as it would in the USA, and there is no way a government would set a precedent that all you need to make it capitulate is wave a gun around. I…

> the simple fact is that the government will win in the game of “who has more guns and power”, just as it would in the USA I do not actually agree with the premise that, in this modern day, governments can no longer be overthrown. Civil wars are not won on the basis of "who started with more guns?".

> I do not actually agree with the premise that, in this modern day, governments can no longer be overthrown.

Of course not. But the Beijing government is not going to be overthrown from Hong Kong. Hong Kong is very small and very far away from Beijing.

And the whole situation, Hong Kongers protesting the removal of some of their 'special' rights isn't exactly winning sympathy among mainlanders.

Re: Protester shot in chest by live police round during Hong Kong protests

#145

Post by throwaway_law »

Redoubts wrote: post #86
chrift wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm confused - are you saying that Afghanistan triumphed?

It's certainly not a win for the US there.

The democratically elected leader was over thrown by the Communist party and the Soviets invaded to support the illegitimate communist government.

The US supported the anti-communist opposition, and the Soviets withdrew and Afghanistan returned to democratic elections.

Like all things politics, its all how you spin it. Perhaps the real loss was what happened after the US spent over $1T to spread democracy in Afghanistan, they began electing the Taliban as their democratic leaders, and we ultimately went to war against the Taliban costing even more. That firmly established the US believes in democracy so long as we also support the party that wins the elections.

Re: Protester shot in chest by live police round during Hong Kong protests

#146

Post by moate »

sudhirj wrote: post #30
swarnie_ wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Non-American here, i never really understood your second amendment or how you cling to it in the modern age. What are a couple of rednecks with assault rifles (which arguably they shouldn't be able to purchase anyway) going to do against semi-autonomy kill droids being flown from a bunker in the desert?

Same thing the original Americans did when protesting the massively better trained and armed British Army. Keep their wits about them and keep fighting. If anything the war in Afghanistan has proven that technology is no match for resilience and grit.

You're completely overlooking the fact that fighting a foreign war =/= fighting a domestic threat. The Afghanis greatest asset is their ability to use their land/people to hide and strike. I don't think you get that advantage in a US civil war, because who would know the US better than US citizens.

Even the previous US civil war isn't a great example because that was a regional war before modern technology. You could have guerilla forces hiding out in southern backwaters that the Union wasn't familiar with. It would be much harder to do that in a country as massively surveilled as the modern US.

These wars would not be the same, and this represents a fundamental misunderstanding of the scope of the conflict.

Re: Protester shot in chest by live police round during Hong Kong protests

#147

Post by khuey »

grugq wrote: post #53

This should be put in some context. Today is the anniversary of China as a communist country. The Hong Kong marchers were all wearing black today as a sign of mourning. That is why the kids are dressed in black (so please, no black bloc/antifa comments.) The police have been particularly aggressive towards protestors and journalists. They deliberately shoot tear gas at journalist "clusters" (presumably to prevent doc…

They've been wearing black for the five months or whatever that this has been going on.

Re: Protester shot in chest by live police round during Hong Kong protests

#148

Post by jimktrains2 »

orf wrote: post #70
mc32 wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I see it the opposite way, the tanks become a last resort. They have to use hard power rather than alternatives.

You’d think that an armed protest group would mean that the government reacts with _less_ force? Rather than simply deploying an appropriate amount of force to stop them? Because the simple fact is that the government will win in the game of “who has more guns and power”, just as it would in the USA, and there is no way a government would set a precedent that all you need to make it capitulate is wave a gun around. I…

> Because the simple fact is that the government will win in the game of “who has more guns and power”, just as it would in the USA

Just like it worked out for the US in Vietnam, Afghanistan, and Iraq?

Re: Protester shot in chest by live police round during Hong Kong protests

#149

Post by geggam »

wffurr wrote: post #98
swebs wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the problems are unrelated to gun ownership. If you were to plot the percent of gun ownership vs the crime rate among various states or even countries, you wouldn't find much of a correlation.

It's actually quite clear that there is a strong correlation between gun ownership and gun violence: https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/hicrc/firearms-research/guns-an... Overall crime, no, there is no correlation, but there is for guns used in crimes, which dramatically increases the rate of deaths and severity of those crimes.

Wouldnt that be a common sense thing ?

A criminal mind would use the tools available and a gun makes throwing rocks (chunks of lead) at people deadly more often than using your hand.

Look at criminal states, those leaders use armies instead of guns because they have an army available.

Re: Protester shot in chest by live police round during Hong Kong protests

#150

Post by ORioN63 »

zacharytelschow wrote: post #104
kristiandupont wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If HK'ers had a similar right to carry guns, do you honestly believe that they would be any better off right now?

Do you think it's coincidental tyrants are more powerful when their populace is unarmed?

Do you have sources to back that claim?
Post reply on HN