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

751–760 of 957 posts

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

#751

Post by samus »

munk-a wrote: post #616
UnFleshedOne wrote: post #410

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not everyone who has guns, but everyone who resists. Even worst tyranny has some public support usually. And if people who tend to have guns are more inclined to support your flavor of tyranny (because you purpose-built it that way), you side step most of those problems.

> Even worst tyranny has some public support usually. Tyranny always has public support. The evil wizard lord of a kingdom scenario has never and will never occur in reality - someone despised by everyone cannot come into power... That doesn't mean the tyrant has the majority of public support, but I'd find it hard to believe any tyrant has less than 30% when coming to power.

The Nazis started their power grab in earnest after the arsoning of the Reichstag. Even before that incident, public opinion was actually already firmly against the communists. To this day there are debates on who exactly arsoned the Reichstag, but it was suspiciously convenient for the Nazis so they could blame the communists. Soon after this incident, laws were passed that effectively abolished the constitution and granted the Nazi the power they required to establish their rule.

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

#752

Post by specialist »

solidsnack9000 wrote: post #661
bdowling wrote: post #567

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If the USA implemented all of Switzerland’s gun laws, a citizen who passes a background check would be able to buy a newly-made full-automatic machine gun that is not allowed in the US outside of law enforcement or military. I’m not sure that is what you’re implying that you’d want.

In Switzerland, people can not actually buy those guns, I don't think. They are issued by the military to pretty much everybody, that's true -- but they are kept on base these days, not at home. One of the big differences between US gun culture and Swiss gun culture is that in the US we believe in a certain right "to enjoy arms", to keep and bear them in an undisciplined and disorganised way.

Other big differences are identity and profit motive.

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

#753

Post by specialist »

behringer wrote: post #629
bdowling wrote: post #567

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If the USA implemented all of Switzerland’s gun laws, a citizen who passes a background check would be able to buy a newly-made full-automatic machine gun that is not allowed in the US outside of law enforcement or military. I’m not sure that is what you’re implying that you’d want.

He's saying he wants to have the 2nd amendment while simultaneously having sane gun laws that are also enforced.

Slippery slope arguments preclude judgement.

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

#754

Post by dragonwriter »

magduf wrote: post #698
X6S1x6Okd1st wrote: post #469

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nuclear states don't attack other nuclear states for a reason. NYC, LA, DC, Atlanta, Chicago, Huston, Dallas are all potential targets if the US declares war. Most of the US army would be going to war with no home to go back to.

If China did a nuclear attack, the US Army wouldn't be involved at all in any war. They'd sit back while the US Air Force and Navy completely nuked China. There wouldn't be an invasion because there'd be nothing left to invade at that point, so no army would be needed. Remember, the US's nuclear arsenal is far, far larger than China's. Such a conflict would be devastating to the US (and to many other places due to fa…

> If China did a nuclear attack, the US Army wouldn't be involved at all in any war.

The proposal was that the US would attempt to invade, decapitate, and replace the Chinese regime; the idea of Chinese nuclear action was as a response to that.

So the Army would already be involved, and US nuclear annihilation of China would be nuking our own army.

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

#755

Post by mav3rick »

mikeyouse wrote: post #741
kube-system wrote: post #729

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> No one is taking away your guns. You're right, but it's not due to a lack of trying. Kamala Harris, Cory Booker, and Beto O’Rourke all support mandatory buybacks.

Of specific guns, namely rifles designed for military use. Shotguns, pistols, and low-capacity rifles are still fine.

Yes you don't need AR-15 for basic protection.

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

#756

Post by ARandomerDude »

mav3rick wrote: post #696
cwkoss wrote: post #580

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it is unfortunate that so many Americans don't know about the history of the Black Panthers. In US public school system, we are taught that the Civil Rights Act was won through peaceful marching - this is not the whole story. Black Panthers carried guns to protect protests, and having guns created a situation where cops could not rush in and beat dissent into submission. There is a strong argument that withou…

Most people want stricter background checks. If you pass the checks it's fine. No one is taking away your guns.

Democratic candidates are proposing it in national debates though.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FXcL_I3uTGI

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

#757

Post by cwkoss »

ARandomerDude wrote: post #756
mav3rick wrote: post #696

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most people want stricter background checks. If you pass the checks it's fine. No one is taking away your guns.

Democratic candidates are proposing it in national debates though. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FXcL_I3uTGI

The reception of his response to this on Beto O'Rouke's reddit AMA was amusing: he received 13k+ downvotes

https://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/d6etv5/hi_im_beto_oro...

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

#758

Post by uoaei »

baybal2 wrote: post #188
fennecfoxen wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ah yes, democratic representation and sovereignty. Entirely unthinkable.

Imagine yourself a party bureaucrat. Would you do a 100% career ending move? That's why I point to the crisis being irresolvable. No way out of this for both sides.

Such is the distinction between what is good in a utilitarian sense and what is good in an ethical sense.

Blind and dogmatic utilitarianism says "it's in the politician's best interest to suppress the citizenry". Ethics says "it's in the people's interest for the politician to be nice to them".

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

#759

Post by close04 »

CompanionCuuube wrote: post #621
close04 wrote: post #289

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The point I was making is that we aren't just talking about people with guns (the ones who had them) but people with guns and training . But judging from the downvotes most people assume the only thing they need to effectively stop a mass shooter or fight a war is a gun.

No, the problem with your comment was that it is based upon a faulty assumption regarding the presence of armed and trained personnel being abundant on a military base. The comment in response to your point was correcting you on that incorrect assumption: an overwhelming majority of base personnel were not armed , because they weren't MPs.

You chose to ignore both the fact that the rest of the arguments are perfectly valid and that the clarification I made right below still stands. The aggressive tone you chose to use is both unnecessary and unwelcome.

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

#760

Post by GhettoMaestro »

allannienhuis wrote: post #748
thisisnico wrote: post #739

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have witnessed a teen use bear spray in a fight that took place outside of tim hortons between 20 teens and an (Not naming) Food delivery service driver in their mid 40's. The guy was screaming on the floor for an hour. The Police considered it as a weapon.

still better than having been shot multiple times at close range, no?

Oh man I'm sure glad that poor youth showed restraint and chose bear mace instead of the glock!

Sounds like you just made a great reason for concealed carry.

Post reply on HN