Earlier quoted context omitted.
Then you make it law that it becomes required.
I guess I'm just on the side of: if the only thing we think police should be doing is something they already legally don't have to do, achieving the goal of getting that covered is better handled by tearing the entire system down and building a new system with a new name and new members than trying to force reform on orgs that have fought it tooth and nail. The actors that have gotten rulings like Warren v. District…
Capitol Hill Autonomous Zone
801–810 of 920 posts
Re: Capitol Hill Autonomous Zone
#802Seattle police vacated the east precinct, fully expecting protesters to burn it down. Instead, the protesters set up an open zone, compiled a set of demands, and from all accounts set up something cool and unique. Here's hoping it sustains itself for a while.
Re: Capitol Hill Autonomous Zone
#803Earlier quoted context omitted.
Make it their duty to protect you.
Right, because police rarely break the law?
Why is it so hard for americans to imagine that it's possible to have atleast a semifunctional police apparatus?
Re: Capitol Hill Autonomous Zone
#804Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The second amendment exists in the US Constitution, first and foremost to balance the power between a populous and would-be tyrants. So the solution for police not being regulated enough, is for the people to take up arms against them? Rather than fixing the regulations?
Firstly, I never said anything about taking up arms against anyone. I am simply stating the fact that “unchecked power” is impossible when a monopoly of power (force... aka weapons) is held by the state. History has shown us over and over and over that an unarmed populace will either A) be subject to unchecked violence by its overlords, or B) be successfully invaded by new and less desirable overlords. Secondly, “fix…
Which is why the UK gets invaded every other week?
Seems an overly reductive viewpoint.
Re: Capitol Hill Autonomous Zone
#805Earlier quoted context omitted.
I truly don't understand the problem here. Can you tell me what it is that makes these people dangerous and scary, but the similarly armed protestors who showed up at government buildings a month ago — or, frankly, the police — fine?
What makes these people dangerous and scary is that they're carrying dangerous and scary weapons. The flak jackets and face masks aren't making it any less scary either. Personally, I'm not afraid of the police, of protesters, of armed militias, etc. I'm afraid of people with guns. Why does anyone carry a gun, unless they intend to use it, once some set of conditions obtain? I don't want to be around people like that…
Yes, I carry a gun because I intend to use it. In self-defense, if ever necessary.
What is wrong with wanting to protect my own life?
Re: Capitol Hill Autonomous Zone
#806Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's MAD, right? Mutually Assured Destruction. Well, that is the logic of a species that has gone kookoo bonkers bannanas bongos mad and thinks that "let's all threaten each other with total anihilation" is "rational". Why is it so hard to agree to not destroy each other needlessly instead?
Game theory. The instant someone doesn't agree not to destroy, they have a massive upper hand.
Suppose the world agrees to dismantle its nuclear arsenal but a single nation, the great atomic nation of Nuclearia, decides that it will keep its weapons and it will destroy the world unless every other nation obeys its rule. And assume Nuclearia has magickal weapons that do not affect Nuclearia lands, or its citizens. The world refuses to obey and Nuclearia unleashes the nuclear holocaust.
Now what? What did Nuclearia achieve by destroying the rest of the world with nuclear weapons? What will Nuclearia do in a world of its own? Note that the rest of the world is now a radioactive waste where nothing lives and nothing grows. Other nations' lands cannot be annexed and used for farming, because there is no fertile soil left anywhere. While some intrepid souls no doubt long to visit the great glass fields of New York, spending any time outside Nuclearia is deadly and most of the world is a depressing burned desert so travel is pointless and tourism is a joke. International commerce of course is out of the question because there is no other nation than Nuclearia. Any resources, such as metals, gases, fossil fuels etc are limited to what Nuclearia has in its own territory. Any scientific progress is limited to what Nuclearian scientists can achieve on their own, without any input from the outside, given that there is nothing on the outside.
How does destroying everyone else increased Nuclearia's chances of survival?
How do you protect yourself by destroying everyone else?
Re: Capitol Hill Autonomous Zone
#807Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, you're correct and it's a good clarification. Thanks. The rifle in this photo is definitely purchased and would've been subject to the waiting period you mention. I was being a being a bit sarcastic about his gear being brand new and forgot about the relatively new laws as part of my joke. :)
True, I'm being needlessly pedantic here :) And who knows, they could have bought the parts and assembled it, if they can find things in stock somewhere.
M&P 15 is a complete knockoff of US military M4/M4A1 carbine, except barrel is longer and has no full auto function to comply with regulations.
Way too boring configuration to build from parts or build out of an 80% blank, and also probably not an airsoft.
Disclaimer: I’m an airsofter outside US at best in the context
Re: Capitol Hill Autonomous Zone
#808Re: Capitol Hill Autonomous Zone
#809All: this story is here because it's an interesting phenomenon, a la https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html . Before commenting, please make sure you're up to date on those rules and post in the intended spirit (curiosity and conversation) not the opposite one (ideology and battle).
This is a stub comment to collect replies in one place, so that it can be collapsed and prevent too much offtopicness at the top of the thread.
Re: Capitol Hill Autonomous Zone
#810Earlier quoted context omitted.
Going Godwin? You are the first; something to mull over, I suppose. (I separate your "Nazi" from the "neonazi" used in an adjacent post). However, as Antifa is decidedly Anti-Fascist and without the paramilitary aspect of the brownshirts, perhaps they would be more closely identified with the Rotfrontkämpferbund.
> Antifa is decidedly Anti-Fascist I have not noticed this. They seem like a hateful mob to me. Or worse. I'll be happy enough if the Feds just roll them up.
Seattle is a special snowflake because their PD is actively white supremacist and they regularly have out of town white supremacists harassing the local populace.
I'm happy their doing their thing when government fails so hard at its job.