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

411–420 of 957 posts

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

#411

Post by coryfklein »

nvahalik wrote: post #18

> Imagine if the US suddenly had a dictator This is why we have the second amendment. And the constitution as the thing to which office-holders swear allegiance to rather than to "the party" or "the president".

I laugh at this as well. Most of today's gun owners clutch their weapons as a bastion against attempts for their liberty, while simultaneously crying that for decades the government has done nothing but just that!

Sure the OP scenario of sudden-dictator is bizarre, that's not how it works. If the U.S. ever falls to dictatorship, it will be like a frog boiling in water, and there will never be a single trigger point to erupt the populace into violent revolt.

Just look at what we have today! The majority of gun owners are the staunchest supporters of our most authoritarian president ever. You don't need to worry about a violent revolution when the gun owners are "voting" for you already.

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

#412

Post by jki275 »

enraged_camel wrote: post #345
tenaciousDaniel wrote: post #316

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I just don't see any historical evidence that superior weaponry always wins, whereas there are plenty of examples to the contrary. So I don't know why it's a "fact" that the dictator would still win.

Except the US military doesn't just have superior weaponry. It also has superior training, superior discipline, superior logistics, superior intelligence, superior force projection capability, superior everything . Unlike the Taliban or the Viet Cong, the US citizenry, even armed, would be like chaff. edit: so many downvotes. I guess I hit a sore spot. I'm sorry the truth hurts, guys and gals. :)

The US citizenry includes an absolute fuckton of former military.

You're simply wrong, it's not "the truth".

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

#413

Post by reroute1 »

josephdviviano wrote: post #238
bhupy wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The US (with its support of the military) has been at war in the Middle East for nearly 2 decades now with insurgents. The argument is not that a rebellious citizenry will necessarily win a war, it's that it will draw out a bloody civil war so long and so expensive as to be a form of mutually assured destruction, the risk of which acts as a check in and of itself.

The fact is that the dictator would still win. The rebellious citizenry would live a life of absolute misery, just as those in the middle east do. The 2nd amendment made a lot of sense when weaponry consisted of horses and rifles, not computer-guided missiles. If there was ever a true US dictator, the 2nd amendment would mostly be used by the oppressed to rob, attack, and oppress one another.

This is assuming that the military and all constituents would follow martial law, which I think is not at all a certainty.

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

#414

Post by nostrademons »

slg wrote: post #367
daenz wrote: post #338

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>The 2nd amendment made a lot of sense when weaponry consisted of horses and rifles, not computer-guided missiles. Let me make sure I understand your basic premise: the ability to defend yourself against a tyrannical dictatorship made sense until the government developed better technology, now it's pointless so just give up your guns? Aside from being completely contrary to the American spirit of defending yourself f…

Isn't this basically what the fascist in Germany, the communists in China and the Soviet Union, and countless other examples did? It is weird that people think that Americans are somehow a morally superior people to all the other countries that had already fallen down that path. I mean we are already locking up toddlers in cages and I haven't heard a single report of any push back from the people who are controlling…

Surprised you're downvoted. The U.S. already has one civil war in its history, conducted when the 2nd amendment was in force and even more people owned guns than do today. It played out exactly like what the grandparent said was ridiculous: the respective militaries fired into every rural and urban home, set whole plantations on fire, destroyed their own infrastructure, killed their brothers and extended families, fought over their hometowns, and caused thousands of civilian casualties. There were in fact regional coups - really, the whole thing was one big regional coup, with some fractal splitting in the borderlands - but that didn't stop the bloodshed. And eventually, the guy who nobody in the rebellious states voted for won.

War is not rational. People will destroy all sorts of stuff if something close to their identity is under threat.

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

#415

Post by manfredo »

enraged_camel wrote: post #345
tenaciousDaniel wrote: post #316

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I just don't see any historical evidence that superior weaponry always wins, whereas there are plenty of examples to the contrary. So I don't know why it's a "fact" that the dictator would still win.

Except the US military doesn't just have superior weaponry. It also has superior training, superior discipline, superior logistics, superior intelligence, superior force projection capability, superior everything . Unlike the Taliban or the Viet Cong, the US citizenry, even armed, would be like chaff. edit: so many downvotes. I guess I hit a sore spot. I'm sorry the truth hurts, guys and gals. :)

Will those superior logistics stay in place when mountain passes are swarming with insurgents, and railways are getting bombed left and right? What good will the advanced weapons be when the insurgents are blending into your own taxpayers?

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

#416

Post by UIZealot »

Legogris wrote: post #299
UIZealot wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The CCP control is being implemented which is what the protesters are against. Really ? How exactly is it being implemented? EDIT: Down-voters, can you answer the question? Or are you just going to try to bury it with down-votes?

There are several reports of people whom the CCP views as antagonistic having gone missing when flying into or through China. Bookshop owners, political activists and writers, for example. The strong reaction against the extradition bill comes to a large part out of (reasonable) fear that it will be abused as a tool to get rid of dissidents and pro-independence elements.

I'm only aware of Gui Minhai, a book store owner. He had to appear on TV in China and give a confession of guilt, but was afterwards free to go home. He is not missing. And he is not serving time, the GGP was mistaken.

(EDIT: I stand corrected, if reports of his continuing detention in mainland China are true. His is certainly a curious, unfortunately, and extreme case. It does not take away from the fact that Hong Kong still has a functioning judiciary system independent from mainland China, and the vast vast majority of Hong Kong citizens have no reason to fear the same fate.)

The extradition treaty has officially been withdrawn as a result of the protests.

That alone should tell you that Hong Kong has been able to maintain substantial autonomy from the central Chinese government.

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

#417

Post by dragonwriter »

umvi wrote: post #401
parliament32 wrote: post #377

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm usually not a huge fan of the US rolling in and stomping out governments (and installing their own, of course), but this is one faux-dictatorship where it sorely needs to happen. Some actual democracy would be amazing for these people. With the recent "trade war" and whatnot the stage has been set pretty well for a US intervention.

You can't force democracy upon people that don't want it and aren't ready for it - it ends disastrously. The US tried to do that in the middle east and failed miserably. The only success story seems to be South Korea, but I would argue they wanted democracy and fought alongside the US for it.

> The US tried to do that in the middle east and failed miserably.

The problem was less with democracy and more with trying to impose a common state on a set of opposed communities that had previously only been “united” in the sense that the one the US was least friendly toward was effectively oppressing the others, and even that might have been successful has the US had needed its own past occupation experience and preserved and reformed state security institutions rather than disbanding them with no transition plan, leading to an internal war before the US even got started with establishing democracy.

Not, to be sure, that that makes the idea of the US trying to impose democracy in all or any part of the territory of the PRC even remotely sane.

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

#418

Post by bdamm »

baddox wrote: post #393
loquor wrote: post #349

This might sound alarmist, but do you think China is the biggest upcoming global problem after climate change? For two reasons: 1. China has a totalitarian ruling system. They intend to realize George Orwell's 1984. 2. Present-day China essentially has no ethics. Take the US in comparison. No matter how perverse the people in power become and even if they do messed up things, the US has some founding morals and princ…

What policies does China have which are expansionist?

The belt and road initiative is fascinating, including their cultivation of Africa. The scheme where they lend poor nations money to build ports and then when the port authority fails to fulfill the repayments, they simply take over the port and basically establish a Chinese base is rather diabolical. From a business perspective it is brilliant but it does seem rather obviously predatory. I consider that expansionist. Did America do the same with Panama, did UK do the same with Gibraltar? There are some parallels.

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

#419

Post by magduf »

dragonwriter wrote: post #400
parliament32 wrote: post #377

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm usually not a huge fan of the US rolling in and stomping out governments (and installing their own, of course), but this is one faux-dictatorship where it sorely needs to happen. Some actual democracy would be amazing for these people. With the recent "trade war" and whatnot the stage has been set pretty well for a US intervention.

> I'm usually not a huge fan of the US rolling in and stomping out governments (and installing their own, of course), but this is one faux-dictatorship where it sorely needs to happen. It's not a faux dictatorship, it's the real deal. But, the idea of the US “stomping out” the PRC (or even somehow “just” rejecting it from Hong Kong) and installing its own preferred government is downright insane.

It's not insane, but it would be a horrible and bloody hot war, the likes of which we haven't seen since WWII, and it would probably eclipse WWII in total deaths.

But it's not "insane", because we have precedent for it: it's exactly what happened in WWII: the world's largest economies and industrial powers going into an all-out war, culminating in nuclear attack, and resulting in the deaths of tens of millions. It's happened before, and so it could certainly happen again.

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

#420

Post by [deleted] »

PhasmaFelis wrote: post #283
josephdviviano wrote: post #238

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The fact is that the dictator would still win. The rebellious citizenry would live a life of absolute misery, just as those in the middle east do. The 2nd amendment made a lot of sense when weaponry consisted of horses and rifles, not computer-guided missiles. If there was ever a true US dictator, the 2nd amendment would mostly be used by the oppressed to rob, attack, and oppress one another.

There's an interesting sci-fi dystopia in there, maybe. Everything up to light machine guns are available with no restrictions to anyone who wants to buy them. The government constantly talks up the sanctity of the right to bear arms, and the importance of being prepared at all times to defend innocents against . The dystopian military enforcers wear bulletproof powered armor, and private ownership of any weapon that…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN