Protester shot in chest by live police round during Hong Kong protests • Hacker News Board

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

#511

Post by justsubmit » Tue, Oct 01, 2019, 5:29 PM UTC

Sandman wrote: post #396

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…

> 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? Basically, yes. Do you honestly think people would have any chance against probably the most powerful army in the world? Sure, they could try fighting a guerilla warfare, they'd even inflict some casualties against the enemy but it's unlikely tha…

> Sure, they could try fighting a guerilla warfare, they'd even inflict some casualties against the enemy but it's unlikely that in the end they'd succeed against an army that is professional, highly skilled, better equipped, has better offensive and defensive capabilities, knows a lot more about tactics and logistics and has trained for this type of situation on a daily basis.

Have you heard of the Viet Cong?

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

#512

Post by chrisco255 » Tue, Oct 01, 2019, 5:29 PM UTC

ryan_j_naughton wrote: post #498

chrisco255 wrote: post #433

Earlier quoted context omitted.

After climate change? I have always feared totalitarian governments more than climate change. The death tolls are a hundred million higher.

The six mass extinction event that humanity is currently causing is going to affect billions of people for centuries to come. If we have systemic ecosystem collapses and 90% of species go extinct, there will be a profound effects. When crops fail and fresh, potable water is extremely constrained, authoritarianism will sweep the world at an even more accelerated pace and regional and world wars are likely. It will be…

If humanity is causing extinctions, it's due to habitat destruction and local pollution. Climate change (+0.38C from 1980-2010) is not the cause.

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

#513

Post by eee_honda » Tue, Oct 01, 2019, 5:30 PM UTC

4b11b4 wrote: post #486

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".

The 2nd amendment was never created in order to "rebel" against the government. Think about this: it was the goal of the founders of the Constitution to create a new system which would be fair and just and work well. Checks and balances exist in the three forms of government. If you were creating a new system, would you include a clause that says: just in case I'm getting this wrong, let's make sure it's an unalienab…

>If you were creating a new system, would you include a clause that says: just in case I'm getting this wrong, let's make sure it's an unalienable right for people to have weapons in case they need to kill me?

I didn't grow up in the US, but being exposed to US political discourse, I always took for granted this right wing talking point (though I thought it was ridiculous from the outset). Thank you for providing clarity and a decent looking source on something that, as you point out, makes no sense once you think a little longer about it.

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

#514

Post by pimmen » Tue, Oct 01, 2019, 5:30 PM UTC

UIZealot wrote: post #308

pimmen wrote: post #191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The extradition treaty subjecting people to some mainland laws is a step in that direction.

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.

After months of protests. That alone does not convince me.

However, the fact that such a self destructive bill is even proposed by the pro-Beijing government in the first place alone convinces me that ”one country, two systems” is being hollowed out.

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

#515

Post by jpadkins » Tue, Oct 01, 2019, 5:31 PM UTC

Fezzik wrote: post #168

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 always find this sentiment a little silly - if the US President went in to full dictator mode and had the support of the military, do you really think a militia of armed citizens would be anything but gnats against the windshield of the United States Armed Forces? And if s/he did not have the support of the Armed Forces, it would not be a very effective dictatorship and you would not even need guns for a rebellion.…

This has been debated many times. Even the DoD strategic planning has concluded that if a certain % of the population would take up arms, the army would lose an insurgency war (especially if the opposing side has the support of the people).

Also have to factor in the massive defections of trained soldiers and officers from the military. The service members I know are not loyal to a person or group, they are loyal to the idea of the republic.

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

#516

Post by Mirioron » Tue, Oct 01, 2019, 5:31 PM UTC

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.

No way would the dictator win. The US military relies on a huge amount of logistics. Fighting happening on US soil would severely undermine that. You can't exactly bomb your own cities with B-52s, because that's where the bombs are made. The US military would draw maybe a few million people - the rest of the populace would still be over 300 million people with a gun for every single person. Furthermore, it's virtually impossible for the military not to split under a dictator that fights their own people.

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

#517

Post by daenz » Tue, Oct 01, 2019, 5:31 PM UTC

diminoten wrote: post #437

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…

I don't think you've thought this through; you won't be fighting soldiers in your little quest for rebellion, you'll be fighting your neighbor, because your neighbor thinks you're a fucking dumbass who he'd rather kill than reason with, because of how little you've respected honest discourse and conversation over a long period of time. To create an American insurgency would be to threaten everyone around you, and no…

>you'll be fighting your neighbor, because your neighbor thinks you're a fucking dumbass who he'd rather kill than reason with, because of how little you've respected honest discourse and conversation over a long period of time.

I normally wouldn't respond to a post like this, but if you are thinking about hurting people that you disagree with, please seek out some help. This sentence honestly reads like a warning flag to me for someone who has reached their limit for debating peacefully with others.

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

#518

Post by jhedwards » Tue, Oct 01, 2019, 5:33 PM UTC

danbolt wrote: post #485

jhedwards wrote: post #459

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Present-day China essentially has no ethics Source? I lived in China and didn't ever feel like I was in a place without ethics. Different ethics, sure, but it really looks to me like you simply don't know or understand China. The Great Leap Forward had nothing to do with routing out values, it was about hyper-fast industrialization, and it failed. There are real problems with modern China, and, separately, with the…

That’s interesting to hear. Not trying to troll, but I’d love to hear about what you have found to be better about it.

I would say the biggest thing is the emphasis on public works. Wherever I went I was awed by the extent of things that were built just for the public. In the city where I lived there they built a new fancy bridge[0], and a massive park with an island and an art center[1], all for public use, and the city hosts massive public celebrations in these kinds of parks with extensive art installations, music performances etc.

The quality of the high speed rail system barely needs mention, and while the hospital system has some pretty glaring faults the cost of care was low and it was easy and affordable to get medical care. Think of this: when I got an X-ray in China I payed upfront and the radiologist _gave me the x-ray_ so I could bring it to more than one doctor if I wanted a second opinion. The transparency there was refreshing.

Again, there are plenty of brutal negatives, but I just want to show that there are some good things that don't get press.

[0] https://www.treehugger.com/infrastructure/lucky-knot-bridge-...

[1] https://www.dezeen.com/2019/05/03/zaha-hadid-architects-chan...

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

#519

Post by jumelles » Tue, Oct 01, 2019, 5:34 PM UTC

orthecreedence wrote: post #502

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…

> US has some founding morals and principles they do not forget. Excuse my french, but what the fuck are you talking about? How about imprisoning and torturing US citizens without due process in the name of a nebulous war that only gets worse the more we fight it? What about all the puppet governments we've set up so that our corporate overlords can make a quick buck at the expense of some country who's resources we…

The key here is that the executive branch of the US government doesn't get to do these things in a vacuum - both Congress and the Supreme Court temper its power, and though elections in the US are far from perfect they are still free.

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

#520

Post by uoaei » Tue, Oct 01, 2019, 5:34 PM UTC

orthecreedence wrote: post #506

new2628 wrote: post #484

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not sure what you are trying to say here.

He's saying you don't have to worry because by the time it gets really bad, it will be someone else's problem. Which is exactly how we got into this mess in the first place.

The reticence of politicians to address climate change is strongly correlated with their age.

Of course there are outliers but it seems clear that "I'm not going to be alive when the shit hits the fan" does a lot to assuage existential anxieties related to climate change.