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

Chaos in Hong Kong as hundreds of masked men assault protesters, journalists

hongkongfp.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 241 posts

Re: Chaos in Hong Kong as hundreds of masked men assault protesters, journalists

#61

Post by dorfsmay »

wp381640 wrote: post #31
briandear wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is exactly the reason the 2nd Amendment exists in the US constitution. It certainly wasn’t to protect target shooting and hunting, but to protect against precisely the sort of oppression happening in Hong Kong. Governments should fear the people, not the other way around. The 2nd Amendment is a check on tyranny. Those that are downvoting the parent, what’s the solution? In China, you can’t protest your way to fr…

> Chenoweth and Stephan collected data on all violent and nonviolent campaigns from 1900 to 2006 that resulted in the overthrow of a government or in territorial liberation. They created a data set of 323 mass actions. Chenoweth analyzed nearly 160 variables related to success criteria, participant categories, state capacity, and more. The results turned her earlier paradigm on its head — in the aggregate, nonviolent…

This make sense intuitively: governments are better armed than the people (militarized police, military). If guns are used in a conflict between the people and a government, the government will crush the people immediately.

On the other hand, enough protests and civil disobedience will disrupt the economy and the functioning of the government to the point they will have to react, or resign.

I am not American and haven't studied the U.S. history, but the cynic in me cannot help but wonder if the 2nd amendment is kept to let people think they are protected from tyranny while not fighting back any laws and unfair policies. When was the last time a law or policy was successfully fought and turned around in the U.S.?

Re: Chaos in Hong Kong as hundreds of masked men assault protesters, journalists

#62

Post by meddlepal »

RankingMember wrote: post #54
MadSudaca wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The progressives in HN downvote you, but the truth is that being able to use violence to protect your individual freedoms is instrumental to democracy. Few places can boast the level of stability that EEUU has had in the last 150 years. Many were taken over by tyrants and armed mobs, than eventually chose their tyrant. It's no coincidence that in Venezuela the regime disarmed the people with a law that according to t…

Do we really think that armed citizens would have a chance against the current US military? Weaponry has come pretty far since the days the 2nd amendment was created.

The point isn't to win against the US military by overpowering it, but it is to cause enough damage, death, and collateral that you bring the US government to the negotiating table when supporters realize the cost of prolonged battle. You also want to make it look as brutal as possible to get foreign support and condemnation on the world stage.

Also we really don't know what would happen if the US military was asked to start fighting its own citizens. There is no guarantee those orders would be followed... people don't like killing their neighbors even if they're ordered to do it.

Re: Chaos in Hong Kong as hundreds of masked men assault protesters, journalists

#64

Post by [deleted] »

meddlepal wrote: post #57
orf wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What about the many, many other functioning democracies with incredibly strict gun control?

It is all well and good until they stop functioning. Guns empower people to not sit down and just take it when governments consistentenly abuse their power over a long enough period of time.

[deleted]

Re: Chaos in Hong Kong as hundreds of masked men assault protesters, journalists

#65

Post by Drakim »

dsfyu404ed wrote: post #39
lm28469 wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, more guns is always the solution !!! https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/2e/2010_hom...

It's a hell of a lot harder (or at least more costly) to violently impose your will on people who can violently defend themselves.

A civilian population armed with guns to the teeth will still not be able to stand up even a little to a real well organized military with gear.

Maybe it would be more costly, but the escalation would also provide the justification to strike down the population completely and simply murder all the protesters. Instead of reading about peaceful protesters being attacked you'd read about the military taking out insurgents.

Re: Chaos in Hong Kong as hundreds of masked men assault protesters, journalists

#67

Post by noonespecial »

austhrow743 wrote: post #49
lm28469 wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, more guns is always the solution !!! https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/2e/2010_hom...

It's better that a thousand individuals get to kill each other than one person be oppressed by a government.

Change "one person" to "all persons" and you have the heart of the second amendment argument.

You may disagree, but it is not an unreasonable position.

Re: Chaos in Hong Kong as hundreds of masked men assault protesters, journalists

#68

Post by RankingMember »

meddlepal wrote: post #62
RankingMember wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do we really think that armed citizens would have a chance against the current US military? Weaponry has come pretty far since the days the 2nd amendment was created.

The point isn't to win against the US military by overpowering it, but it is to cause enough damage, death, and collateral that you bring the US government to the negotiating table when supporters realize the cost of prolonged battle. You also want to make it look as brutal as possible to get foreign support and condemnation on the world stage. Also we really don't know what would happen if the US military was asked…

I don't think we should have no recourse against a tyrannical government, but I just don't see how anyone is going to realistically go up against the US military and make even a tiny dent.

To your latter point, there are constant human rights abuses/crackdowns on dissent in China, but does anyone intervene? Now consider that the US has military might many times China's. Who's going to intervene?

I, too, would hope for defection if the US military was told to start attacking US citizens. It's important to note, though, that the military goes to great lengths to break recruits down and rebuild them into "warriors" aka unquestioning killing machines.

Re: Chaos in Hong Kong as hundreds of masked men assault protesters, journalists

#69

Post by benj111 »

sho wrote: post #53
benj111 wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The population of Hong Kong is apparently 7+ million, and 2 million went on one of the marches. Doesn't seem 'fringe' to me. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-china-48656471

What do you mean "apparently", like it's some kind of questionable assertion? It's 7+ million, period. It's "fringe" because it's part of China, and even all 7+ million people in HK comprise less than 1% of China. I know many Chinese people, and they do not give a shit about HK's ideas about its own independence. They consider it China, full stop. The example about Seattle "declaring independence" the GP gave is actu…

"What do you mean "apparently""

Nothing beyond being not 100% sure whether that referred to the entirety of the territory or just the city.

I don't think its fair to count the entirety of China when deciding whether its fringe. Irish unification is 'fringe' in the UK, doesn't stop it being important to a sizable proportion of Northern Ireland. South Sudan independence was probably 'fringe' within greater Sudan, that doesn't mean it wasn't important the South Sudanese.

And I never said any independence bid would be successful, that doesn't stop people wanting it. So yes I agree with your last paragraph.

Re: Chaos in Hong Kong as hundreds of masked men assault protesters, journalists

#70

Post by salawat »

chvid wrote: post #59

Does these protest still have broad support? It seems obvious that the HK administration is simply drawing out time and hoping the daily troubles the demonstrators are creating in time will kill their cause.

Broad support by whom?

If you're including population not under the sphere of influence of the Chinese Communist Party, I'd say most likely yes.

If not, of course there isn't broad support in the sense that Hong Kong is a drop in the bucket compared to the rest of the Mainland.

I hate to say it, but I'm expecting that an inevitable Tiananmen 2.0 is in the works; and I have seen nothing to convince me that pushed to the wall, the Chinese Communist party won't write off an entire city to restore "Peace"; excepting the continued existence of Taiwan. That though, in no small manner being a diplomatic stalemate with the rest of the world however.

Post reply on HN