There have been multiple accounts created with the sole purpose of posting advertisement posts or replies containing unsolicited advertising.

Accounts which solely post advertisements, or persistently post them may be terminated.

lennybird ,
@lennybird@lemmy.world avatar

Didn’t we know this for years?

We’re a net-exporter of firearms to south of the border.

In effect, we’ve created a key component of the problem that inevitably feeds mass migration north to flee said crime and poverty.

zephyreks ,

Also a net exporter to north of the border

🤷

Siegfried ,

Violence? Shouldn’t this be labeled as terrorism?

todd_bonzalez ,

Drug Cartel violence can sometimes cross the line to terrorism, but usually isn’t classified that way. Terrorism is generally defined by targeted attacks against civilians in order to achieve political goals. Most drug cartel violence does not meet that definition.

Drug cartel violence is basically just gang violence. Violence for the sake of maintaining power.

I suppose “terrorism” is a more powerful word that evokes greater emotion from people, but we shouldn’t use it inappropriately or we risk separating the word from its own meaning.

lennybird ,
@lennybird@lemmy.world avatar

I’d say their routine targeting of journalists, celebrities, kidnapping of school children fits that definition of terrorism.

kent_eh ,

Those aren’t mutually exclusive terms.

Gennadios ,

This is exactly what I expected to read. Latin gangs keep unaligned affiliates (mostly girlfriends) as straw buyers to pass background checks. I don’t see how its the sellers folault, seems like we just cant keep our migrant and gamg problem under control.

PoliticalAgitator ,

Straw purchasing isn’t an issue in most countries. Buying a weapon may include background checks, psychological evaluation, safety training, being a member at a range or club for 6+ months or even military service. It doesn’t end there either, with many countries requiring registration of purchased firearms with heavy fines if you’re unable to produce the weapon when asked.

Luckily for cartels and criminals, Americas gun laws are dogshit. With private sales, you don’t even need to pass a background check in some places. Straw purchasing isn’t just viable, it’s the fastest, easiest, lowest risk way to secure practically any semi-automatic weapon you want.

But no matter how serious or widespread those failures are, the pro-gun community staunchly opposes addressing them, backed by lobby groups who are keenly aware their profits would be quartered if gun regulations worked.

DFWSAM ,

This illustrates perfectly the need to be able to sue gun manufacturers & retailers. Until they’re hit in the pocketbook, this shit’ll never stop.

KillingTimeItself ,

capitalism enabling the cartels causing the drug war to happen?

Who would’ve guessed.

veganpizza69 ,
@veganpizza69@lemmy.world avatar

Drug cartels are black market capitalists.

KillingTimeItself ,

capitalism is just a legal version of a black market, so yeah pretty much.

girlfreddy ,
@girlfreddy@lemmy.ca avatar

“I respect that the U.S. government wants this shielded, but it’s frustrating that the information isn’t public,” said Celorio, who is leading his country’s lawsuit against American gun manufacturers and five Arizona gun shops. “I think the average American would be surprised that the fentanyl crisis is nurtured because of the number of firearms going to Mexico to empower the cartels.”

Jfc. :(

MelodiousFunk ,

Shipping powders back and forth
Black goes south and white comes north

Doolbs ,

Surprised pikachu face

BigMacHole ,

Seeing which Gun Sellers are behind Mexican Cartel Violence is AGAINST THE CONSTITUTION!

ShittyBeatlesFCPres ,

There’s two sides to every tortilla and as a gun runner, I’m very upset my personal information might be involved in this hack. We need comprehensive privacy laws and real consequences for data breaches. Otherwise, these tech companies will treat this like a cost of doing business.

shalafi ,

U.S. gun shops and smugglers tied to 78,000 firearms recovered south of the border

Oh shit! Wild reveal coming up!

The top 6 (see chart in the article) account for 1,102 total guns, 1.4%. 942 from Academy and Cabela’s, 1.2%.

So, uh, what’s the story here? That a tiny fraction of guns recovered were from 2 of America’s top gun retail outlets?

This is a non-story, nothing to see here except a couple of small timers profiteering.

Liz ,

Nevermind that a lot of the purchases required reporting anyway since buying lots of guns does actually get the attention of law enforcement. People are acting like the US government is keeping its eyes closed.

jordanlund ,
@jordanlund@lemmy.world avatar

“Texan Craig Adlong. He pleaded guilty in 2020 for lying on firearm transaction forms, saying the guns were for his personal use. He purchased 95 semi-automatic rifles at Guns Unlimited in Katy, Texas, making seven visits over two months.

Sixty-six of those firearms were recovered in Mexico, according to the leak.”

How many is too many “for personal use”?

95 guns of the same type is CLEARLY not for personal use. 13 guns per visit x 7 visits? No questions?

I can see buying multiple guns in different form factors, because they’re a tool like anything else, and you need the right size tool for the job.

But if you’re out buying 95 #0 Phillips screwdrivers, that’s not “for personal use”.

catloaf ,

ATF says multiple sales of rifles must be reported. A “multiple sale” is defined as “when a licensed dealer or pawnbroker sells or otherwise disposes of, at one time or during any five consecutive business days, more than one semiautomatic rifle capable of accepting a detachable magazine and with a caliber greater than .22 (including .223/5.56 caliber) to an unlicensed person.”

95 rifles in seven visits obviously qualifies. These absolutely should have been reported.

jordanlund ,
@jordanlund@lemmy.world avatar

Hey, TIL! But I’ve never bought more than one semi-automatic rifle at a time so that tracks!

Have you seen the way gun makers are getting around that restriction now?

The new hotness is LEVER ACTION AR-15s:

offgridweb.com/…/new-bond-arms-lever-action-ar-15…

fightlite.com/hlr-556bpm

catloaf ,

Those have detachable magazines. They fall under this category.

Glemek ,

Lever action is not semi automatic though. Needs both characteristics.

Liz ,

If the lever action lower can function with a semi-auto bolt and buffer system, then the ATF is gonna call it semi-auto anyway and it would still fall under that law. That lower receiver doesn’t have space for a buffer, so you’re never gonna be able to run it semi-auto. This is just a box-fed lever action instead of a tube-fed one.

FlyingSquid ,
@FlyingSquid@lemmy.world avatar

Excuse me, but do not crush my dream of diving into a pit filled with #0 Phillips screwdrivers.

Tryptaminev ,

I can see buying multiple guns in different form factors, because they’re a tool like anything else, and you need the right size tool for the job.

As you need proper training on each individual gun i find it hard to believe that there is any person who reasonably needs more than 5 or 6 firearms and that includes sports, hunting and self defense

jordanlund ,
@jordanlund@lemmy.world avatar

Well, rifles are rifles and pistols are pistols. The skill set downgrades pretty easy, upgrading not so much.

After shooting my .45-70 Government, a .22 pea shooter is no big deal, going the OTHER way though…

Hackworth ,

Peas don’t kill people. Peasple…

jordanlund ,
@jordanlund@lemmy.world avatar

Nah, never shot anything more threatening than an old school metal coffee can. Just being a gun owner doesn’t make you dangerous.

I own several hammers too, doesn’t make me a carpenter. ;)

Hackworth ,

Oh I was just making a dumb joke about calling a 22 a pea. I’m a videographer and don’t own a camera, haha.

NoIWontPickAName ,

You don’t need proper training in every one, you need to be trained in pistols, rifles, and shotguns, and honestly you could probably just do long guns and hand guns, but I just feel like people should really be trained in all 3.

There are just too many differences between hunting rifles and shotguns.

I’m not even going to touch “self defense” rifles like an AR-15 because unless you live out in the sticks you will just be endangering your neighbors with how far they travel.

ArcaneSlime ,

Actually studies show that a proper .223 or 5.56 JHP (or soft, varmint, or frangible) penetrates less through drywall than 00 buck.

I mean, yeah, the steel core penetrators will zip right through, but that isn’t on the gun that’s on you not knowing what ammo to use.

Liz ,

The dude made a distinction between an AR and a regular rifle, implying the bullet travels further if it’s launched from an AR platform. I don’t think they know much about penetration characteristics.

ArcaneSlime ,

LOL tbf I thought he was talking about overpenetration, but upon rereading I think you’re right haha.

Tryptaminev ,

And each gun needs to be zeroed individually, needs to be maintained individually, behaves differently… Someone who has four hunting rifles will be a worse shot than someone who has one and uses it for everything. The notion of needing “specific tools” just stops making sense at that point.

jordanlund ,
@jordanlund@lemmy.world avatar

I mean… I had a raccoon problem, right? Mom, dad, three babies. Babies were cute, but were tearing up the place and screaming, OMG, like 1,000 cat fights every night.

But the problem was dad was getting aggressive, hanging out on the roof, and showing ZERO fear of people.

Now I COULD have picked up my grandfathers .30-06, but then the problem then would have been scraping raccoon parts off the roof and nobody has time for that.

So I went the other direction. Took my dad’s 1000fps pellet rifle and shot him in the ass. Not only did he set off running, he took mom and babies with him.

So, yeah, right tool for the job. ;)

TexasDrunk ,

Hey, that isn’t too far from me! I’m absolutely SHOCKED.

PyroNeurosis ,

Best use case I can tgink of for multiple copies of the same gun is torture tests? Or something similar where the gun is not expected to be functional afterwards. And even then >~5 is kind of excessive.

jordanlund ,
@jordanlund@lemmy.world avatar

I could see that. Multiples of the same gun so you could, I dunno, test one in a salt water environment, freshwater rainforest, desert, arctic, and control.

But 95? Yeah, no.

KevonLooney ,

You might be wondering why this information isn’t public already. Republicans passed a law to keep this information private. Yes, they’re protecting the identity of criminals selling guns to cartels.

Fucking vote

FreudianCafe ,

Yeah, its time for democrats to protect the identity of criminals selling guns to cartels.

Fucking vote

PunnyName ,

What

Snowpix ,
@Snowpix@lemmy.ca avatar

Troll. Downvote and ignore them.

FreudianCafe ,

Just pointing out that no matter who you vote, everything stays the same

PunnyName ,

Says someone who doesn’t understand, or interact with, the political process.

Vote local. Canvas. Look at candidate histories and platforms. Work with candidates you support. And any time a ranked voting system is up for a vote, VOTE FOR IT.

Buelldozer ,
@Buelldozer@lemmy.today avatar

Republicans passed a law to keep this information private.

They passed a law requiring the Mexican Government to keep it private? Fascinating…tell me more!

MeaanBeaan ,

Per the linked article.

“Gun trace data is kept out of public view by a rider to a Congressional bill known as the “Tiahrt Amendment,” passed in 2003 to shield gun shops from scrutiny. Each year, the ATF provides a count of the guns recovered in Mexico that had been bought in the U.S., with no further details.”

Nothing to do with the Mexican govt. The US govt passed a law in 2003 to prevent gun sale data from being public record. This includes sales of firearms eventually used in armed conflicts in Mexico.

Buelldozer ,
@Buelldozer@lemmy.today avatar

Nothing to do with the Mexican govt.

I’m interested to know how the Mexican Government, who also had / has the trace data, is bound by the Tiahart Amendment.

I know it’s going to be an unpopular opinion but I really see no problem with the Tiahart Amendment shielding Firearms Manufacturers and Gun Stores. The Manufacturers are already regulated and monitored directly by the Federal Government and Gun Stores can only make sales in compliance with Federal Law. They should not be culpable in either Criminal or Civil court for that reason. The truth is that most of the organization who want that data aren’t working in Good Faith and only want it so they can launch lawsuits meant to force Manufacturers and Sellers out of business.

It gets even worse at the individual level. There is absolutely zero cause for firearm transaction records to an individual to be publicly available. It’s not only a gross violation of privacy but it’s also a security concern.

What you SHOULD be mad about is why the BATFE, who clearly and provably does have this data, isn’t doing something with it. They already know literally everything in this article and yet they don’t seem to be doing much about it. Why?

MeaanBeaan ,

I can be both mad that this data isn’t public record and that the BATFE aren’t doing their jobs.

I would disagree that there’s zero reason for this data to be public record. I’d agree with you if we were just shielding individuals who are purchasing like one handgun or something. That’s something that I don’t think is anyone else’s business. But if a dude is buying 95 semi-automatic rifles in a short period of time you bet your ass I think that should be public knowledge. No one should be able to secretly purchase enough firearms to arm a small militia.

Buelldozer ,
@Buelldozer@lemmy.today avatar

But if a dude is buying 95 semi-automatic rifles in a short period of time you bet your ass I think that should be public knowledge.

I disagree, I really don’t see why it’s any business of the PUBLIC (nor is there anything you could do about it.) But hold on…

No one should be able to secretly purchase enough firearms to arm a small malitia.

That’s the thing, it’s NOT “secret”. The FBI and the BATFE both know they are just choosing not to do anything about it. I mean they literally KNOW, and not in some vague / abstract manner that is time delayed. They know in near real time that one purchaser has submitted a 4473 with multiple firearms on it and they also know if a single purchaser submits multiple form 4473s.

So when Craig Adlong was showing up to the Gun Store and buying 15,16,17 Rifles at a time multiple times a week both the BATFE and the FBI KNEW and chose not to do anything. They could have delayed or denied any of the transfers (sales) and / or sent out a Field Agent to figure out what was going on. They didn’t.

This is the foundation of my “The public doesn’t need to know” argument when it comes to individuals. Assuming the Gun Store is complying with Federal Law then this isn’t happening in secret. At least two different Federal Law Enforcement Agencies know about it.

FlyingSquid ,
@FlyingSquid@lemmy.world avatar

I would say that most of the PUBLIC wants to know if someone is doing illegal arms dealing to murderous Mexican cartels in their town.

brbposting ,

@Buelldozer - I’m out of my element here:

Would you argue the public has elected officials who write policy and hire enforcers to govern arms, so we have a pathway to preventing illegal arms deals even if it’s not via the direct publication of details of original purchasers?

I can see tradeoffs here. I can imagine the security and harassment concern. I could also envision public benefit where our officials fail us but investigative reporters pick up the slack and shine light on specific problematic sales, leading to outcry and subsequently improved enforcement.

Perhaps illegal sales are a top NRA priority since these discussions involve some dangerous thinking from their perspective. If not, hope so, sounds win win.

ArcaneSlime ,

Honestly I don’t need a public record of people buying “too many” guns that may be selling them to cartels, I’m fine with the federal agents tasked with investigating such cases doing so and then reporting their findings when someone is guilty. I mean, they already know, what am I gonna do, tell em harder?

FlyingSquid ,
@FlyingSquid@lemmy.world avatar

I’m not sure why you’re fine with that. Maybe you don’t know about this?

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ATF_gunwalking_scandal

They literally allowed straw purchases to cartels repeatedly knowing that it was happening.

Why would you trust federal agents when they let that happen?

ArcaneSlime ,

I should say, I’m fine with it if they actually do it, rather than being one of the largest contributers to it.

Still though even if they don’t, I don’t have jurisdiction in, well, anywhere, so again I ask what the fuck I plan to do about it if they did release such a privacy invading “rob me” list like California does? Say “hey mister are you selling these legally or not?” Great. What next? I’m not going to assault the dude’s house and steal his guns at gunpoint myself, if the agencies tasked with doing something about it don’t, why even keep a list? Why even report multiple sales if the only people who can do anything don’t?

FlyingSquid ,
@FlyingSquid@lemmy.world avatar

In theory, state or even local law enforcement could do something about it.

ArcaneSlime ,

Sure they could, without that information being public. Public means you or I, who are not authorities that could do anything about anything, could look up a list. The authorities, be they federal, state, or local law enforcement, I am more comfortable with them having a list than you or me, yes.

Although tbh I’m not actually sure the state or local PD could do anything, if it is federal’s jurisdiction because of trafficking across state/country lines (which is a thing). It’s entirely possible they’d have to go through the FBI. Still though let’s assume they could do something about it, why then would you and me need the list?

hakase ,

Since you’re getting blasted here, I just wanted to hop on the downvote train to let you know that I think you’re exactly right on all counts.

GiveMemes ,

That’s a huge risk for robbery and basically just asking for trouble. Shit tier idea to make that public knowledge tbh. Criminal doesn’t have a gun? Good thing they can just find someone that does. Already have one? Then they rob someone with 30 and put the guns onto the black market (still registered to the previous owner.)

PoliticalAgitator ,

Aren’t you forgetting something? Every gun owner is a super cool action hero and if anyone tries to break into their house they’ll be all “blam blam blam” and they’ll be able to turn on their wives again.

GiveMemes ,

I forgot the answer to argument is a snarky remark.

PoliticalAgitator ,

The answer has been given over and over again but it doesn’t meet the pro-gun communities deliberately impossible standards. Why bother answering it yet again?

ArcaneSlime ,

Frankly the answer is “make the cops do their fucking jobs” not “make a list of gun purchasers public.” Public means that you or I could access the list, what the hell do you plan to do with this list? Tell the FBI “hey that list you maintain has a new entry, as you know, because you’re the ones keeping the list?” Do you have jurisdiction anywhere on the entire planet? The literal only reason to make it public is to have a handy list of what houses it’s safe to break into when occupied vs when unoccupied. It’s basically a treasure map to arm criminals.

PoliticalAgitator , (edited )

What made you think I cared? I’ve never advocated making gun owners public knowledge, I’m just laughing because gun owners insist their guns can keep them safe from criminals but shrivel up at the idea of those criminals knowing where they live and targeting them specifically.

As always with the pro-gun community, consequences are other people.

ArcaneSlime ,

Ya mama said you did.

Are you really dumb enough that you can’t see how regardless of a gun owner’s ability to defend themselves while they are home, they also don’t want people targeting their house for theft while they aren’t home based on a “has gun” list? Do you want stolen guns to end up in the hands of criminals? You think they have some magical ability to shoot people while they aren’t at the location of the theft or something? This isn’t fallout with grenade bouquets lmao.

As always with the pro-gun community, consequences are other people.

The consequences are the people’s who commit the crime, not the gun owning populace as a whole who has not? Yes.

PoliticalAgitator ,

You really need to get your feelings out about this don’t you? The world must no your opinion, even the people who aren’t actually advocating it.

Anyway, your feelings are bullshit. The pro-gun community routinely opposes safe storage laws and are happy to leave guns in glove compartments and closets. Not that the black market is required to arm criminals, given how easy it is to pass a background check, straw purchase or buy privately but again, the pro-gun community opposes reforms to combat all of that.

So whatever the fuck “The consequences are the people’s who commit the crime, not the gun owning populace as a whole who has not? Yes” is supposed to mean, it’s clear that you’re only upset that you would be in danger, since you put other people in danger all the time.

ArcaneSlime ,

Safe storage penalizes victims for being stolen from and is a tax to stop those dirty poors from having guns, glove compartments are necessary sometimes to follow the laws regarding where you can and can’t carry which is the fault of the business and government that is forcing it, not the one forced to.

Not that the black market is required to arm criminals

Well it is if they’ve been charged with something.

given how easy it is to pass a background check,

Oh so “no criminal record,” shocker.

straw purchase

Illegal.

or buy privately

Illegal if you’re a prohibited possessor.

And even with all that, publishing a list is still stupid. I put nobody in danger, you’re projecting, it’s your stupid ideas on guns that endanger people, and not even gun owners but the people who will be harmed with their stolen guns. You don’t give a shit though because if they die it “owns the republitards” so it’s actually a win for you, I know.

PoliticalAgitator , (edited )

Safe storage penalizes victims for being stolen from

Good. If you didn’t take reasonable steps to secure your firearms, your negligence armed criminals. Guns are already an exception to “dangerous things must be properly secured” thanks to crybaby gun owners.

Oh and don’t waste your breath with a “B-B-B-But LockPickingLawyer opened this gun safe with his flaccid cock” because that’s not even close to an insurmountable problem.

a tax to stop those dirty poors from having guns

You’re using poor people as a human shield. You’ve never advocated giving people guns as a form of welfare and realistically a gun is one of the last things those “dirty poors” need.

You’re a simp for a multi-billion industry that funds the very worst Republicans and puts profits before lives. You don’t have a leg to stand on.

glove compartments are necessary

Sounds like we know where you leave your gun. It’s grossly negligent and absolutely your fault. Either leave your gun at home (where I’m guessing it’s just as poorly secured) or don’t go to places that don’t want you.

Well it is if they’ve been charged with something. Oh so “no criminal record,” shocker Illegal

Laws that are a complete failure, which the pro-gun community opposes all changes to, including better enforcement.

Illegal if you’re a prohibited possessor

Consequences for other people. The “responsible gun owner” making the private sale gets away with selling a gun to a dangerous person. If we only charged underage people for buying alcohol (and not the person who supplied them), there would be zero expectation of those laws working.

And even with all that, publishing a list is still stupid

Yet again, not actually a thing I advocated, just something I mocked your reaction to. Let’s hope for your families sake you’re not so easily confused when you hear a bump in the night.

I put nobody in danger

Another worthless promise from a gun owner. Whatever minimal vetting you’ve been through is demonstrably not enough to ensure gun owners aren’t a danger. You cleared the same low bar as the people shooting at children who rang their doorbell or used their driveway to turn around.

If we reduce you to a statistic, it’s even more bullshitty. Every person in your household is at a greater risk of domestic homicide and suicide.

it’s your stupid ideas on guns

Are you still throwing a tantrum about an idea I didn’t suggest or supoort, or are you just assuming all of my opinions based on what the gun lobby have told you I believe?

Your laws have failed America. It’s 20 years past when “responsible gun owners” should have actually taken some responsibility.

ArcaneSlime , (edited )

Way to victim blame, if criminals didn’t steal them they wouldn’t be stolen, your logic is rapist logic, “she was asking for it out late at night in that slutty skirt, should’ve locked it up in a chastity belt.”

I actually do advocate for a government program to pass out firearms to individuals in need, like a broke single mother with an abusive ex, for instance. Thing is I’m not the government so what I advocate for doesn’t necessarily become policy. Funny how that works. Furthermore just because something that requires another’s time, labor, and materials is sold by the company that makes it doesn’t mean we should arbitrarily raise it more to make it harder for the poor (of which I am one, btw, “you don’t care about the poor like yourself” is a dumb fucking take.)

Actually I view those laws as unsafe, therefore I just illegally carry past the sign. It’s safer where someone would have to grab my dick to get it than unattended in a car. I’m not supposed to do that though, I’m supposed to leave it in the car. Oopsies. Still if someone does follow the law, the theft is the fault of the thief and the one who made it available for the thief: the law.

“Including” meaning “only” better enforcement, yes. Finish the laws you have at home before buying new ones little Timmy.

EHHH INCORRECT! If you sell a gun to a person who you should reasonably know is a prohibited possessor, like underage people, you get what is called “prison time.” People have also been begging for years for access to NICs to help with this but you don’t want to give it to us.

You’re in a thread about advocating for a public list “mocking” gun owners who think a public list is a bad idea. Sure sounds like you’re advocating for it while trying to pretend you aren’t like a slimy little weasel.

If we reduce you to a statistic,

Hmm ok let’s see, there are 600,000,000 guns in the US, and yearly about 60,000 are used in murders/accidents/suicide, that is a 0.01% chance that in any given year my gun will be involved in a death. “OH NOOOOOOOO.” Btw it’s actually less because this equation assumes each gun only kills one person, but as we know that isn’t the case in every scenario.

We’ve talked before dingus I know you have stupid opinions on guns first hand because you incessantly repeat them lmao.

PoliticalAgitator , (edited )

Way to victim blame

“This woman scratched and bit me while I was raping her, so I’m the real victim”

I remember you now. You’re not worth my time and it doesn’t look like there’s anyone left in the thread who is. I didn’t read most of your comment but laughed when I saw you’ve lifted my insults to use as your own. Looks like you have made space for me in your head.

ArcaneSlime ,

Lol so to you having your house broken into and having things stolen from you is akin to raping someone and being injured while doing it? How do you figure that one? In my view it seems more like the one doing the breaking in is the rapist and you’re arguing that it’s the victims fault for only having one locked door instead of a matryoshka door.

No u lol if me remembering your name as a moron is “making space” you remembering me for always being right is the same. Cute insult attempts though, unfortunately I’d have to have a modicum of respect for you not to think you’re laughably pathetic for it however.

PoliticalAgitator ,

Didn’t read.

ArcaneSlime ,

'Course not lol.

PoliticalAgitator ,

You should really make a token effort to read the article before trying to be a smug fuck about it.

doingthestuff ,

I’m voting to stop elites from disarming the proletariat

ThrowawayPermanente ,

Ok but what if the proletariat are stupid and have bad taste?

ArcaneSlime , (edited )

Then they shouldn’t get to vote either.

Edit: Hmm seems like people only like gatekeeping some rights. Interesting. Personally I think if stupid people deserve one right, they deserve the rest of them too, unless they prove themselves to be a danger to society of course which also applies to “the intelligent.”

And while we’re at it, what is your metric for stupid, not college graduates? Only engineers? “Only people who can spell, (in english)” and so fuck ESL people? Stupid is as stupid does frankly rather subjective, someone who you consider “stupid” for having bad grammar may be a math wizard, better than you, and you never knew, who then is stupid? Both? Neither? “Stupidity” is not a good enough metric to deny anyone any rights. Thank you for coming to my Ted Talk.

fosho ,

so Republican, got it.

barsquid ,

You mean against the “take the guns first” and “blue lives matter” party, right? You’re against authoritarians being able to take guns and being able to freely murder citizens who did nothing other than possess a firearm, right?

Liz ,

I suggest helping implement Approval Voting and then Sequential Proportional Approval Voting so we can ditch the two party system and have more than one party that supports citizens protecting themselves without having to paradoxically supporting a bunch of policies that target citizens for harmless behavior.

PoliticalAgitator ,

Why would they bother to disarm you? They make billions of dollars a year selling you guns and you’re no threat to them at all, physically or politically.

Gerudo ,

But I was told to be angry at the brown people

RizzRustbolt ,

I’m sure they’ll find the darkest person in the c-suite to use as a scapegoat.

Corkyskog ,

Last time I made a comment about US guns being sold to cartels I got down voted hard. A bunch of people telling me they would never buy a semi automatic when they have machine guns.

Some stuff just seems like it’s designed for cartels. Like their favorite handgun: El Presidente in 38 super

ryathal ,

It’s kept private because it would reveal most the guns passed through the government before getting to the cartels.

Godwins_Law ,

If that is the case it’s still a bad law that we should work on repealing…

Gigan ,
@Gigan@lemmy.world avatar

From 2006-2011 agents in Arizona stood down as straw purchasers illegally bought 2,000 guns at shops, intending to use the information to track trafficking patterns and arrest the kingpins. However, agents didn’t deliver the high-level arrests – and in the process, they lost track of hundreds of guns.

This is the shit I think of when I’m paying my taxes.

Buelldozer ,
@Buelldozer@lemmy.today avatar

This shit is why 2A Advocates were so pissed off about Operation Fast & Furious and wouldn’t shut up about it for years. The BATFE forced the gun shops involved to sell the weapons even when they didn’t want to!

Seriously, the whole thing was a shitshow from start to finish and when the manure caught fire everyone involved from the Field Agents through AG Eric Holder lied their assess off about it.

mister_monster ,

Which US weed smokers are behind cartel violence?

mibo80 ,

Not I, a Californian who grows his own cannabis.

bstix ,

I thought we were over the whole “USA bad m’kay” but then shit like that turns up. It’s not okay.

PunnyName ,

USA has always been bad. We aren’t over that. If anything, we’re just getting fucking started.

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • •
  • [email protected]
  • random
  • lifeLocal
  • goranko
  • All magazines
    •