• Sibbo@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    170
    arrow-down
    13
    ·
    8 months ago

    And here my friends, we can see an exhibit from the United States of America.

      • jaxxed@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        22
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        8 months ago

        I think the topic is not so much “gun folks”, but more the idea that the US 2nd amendment right equates with all freedoms.

        • fruitycoder@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          8 months ago

          The first and second amendments are seen as the cornor stone rights for sure in the US. They enable and protect each other and other rights played out in the constitution.

    • bi_tux@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      18
      arrow-down
      109
      ·
      8 months ago

      I tend to disagree for following reasons:

      - freedom ends where someone elses freedom begins

      - no one said freedom was save

      - people don’t stop to murder other people without guns

      • Fedizen@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        57
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        8 months ago

        Its a joke, don’t think too hard about it.

        Freedom as a concept is to vague and personal to be useful any kind of real discussion; “freedom” means whatever you think it means. This is why politicians love to say it.

        I would say that you’re right guns make people feel safe.

        However, that the constant threat of violence in society leads to degradation of social norms, especially for children who then get less socialization and become more extreme.

        You see this in like more people choosing to homeschool their kids - they then get lower quality education and poorer social skills and are less able to survive in society. In a capitalist world, this is slowly eating away the ability of americans to compete in a global economy and so there is a strong movement to isolate our economy which will only make us less competitive.

      • SkippingRelax@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        13
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        As a rule of thumb people stop to mass murder other people, without guns. With extremely rare exceptions, we don’t have that shit outside of the US and our schools are not shooting ranges.

        The other two things you wrote are not reasons, they are a) a slogan that you could put on a 12 years old t shirt and b) something someone who is having a heart attack might say

      • UnculturedSwine@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        people don’t stop to murder other people without guns

        I live in a red state with lax gun laws. This is probably the stupidest thing I’ve heard anyone say on the Internet. You should sit down and have a talk with Ahmaud Arbery.

      • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        8 months ago

        It’s it a typo and you’re saying “people don’t stop murdering others without guns”?

  • HappyRedditRefugee@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    127
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    8 months ago

    Tho I support gun ownership, this guy has no business owning a gun

    “If you are a [in my perception] a communist, you don’t wanna step on my lawn” === “If I don’t agree with you, I’ll shoot you”

    Plus anyone saying “communist states” is definetly fallen victim of right wing propaganda and haven’t even take the time to research what communisim is. Even the US left political wing is quite capitalisitic.

    Just a bunch of bad “arguments” bagged up with slapsticks words which he doesn’t even know the meaning of.

    • dumpsterlid@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      72
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      I watched this guy for a little bit and liked his Linux stuff and then in one video he started ranting about how those FOSS licenses that include a requirement to use software ethically are the worst thing in the universe because they bring politics into software and I thought “wait, this guy is ignorant asshole isn’t he?” and turns out yes, yes he is.

      Not making the point to defend those licenses or not but all this guy cared about was FOSS not being political and it’s like…are you a child? Do you not understand how all of this is political?

      People like this guy give FOSS a really ugly outward facing identity and it turns away soooo many potential contributors and chill people.

      To your point about this guy being exactly the kind of person that shouldn’t be allowed to own a precision semiautomatic rifle with 30 round magazines of high caliber rifle rounds, I agree, I have seen that guy get so fucking angry about shit on his channel, he has no ability to control his anger and that kind of person shouldn’t be allowed to own an object that gives their temper tantrums the capacity to kill so many people so quickly before their rational control kicks back in.

      • HappyRedditRefugee@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        44
        ·
        8 months ago

        “I don’t wanna get political in this video”

        Get’s mega political and starts using political lingo used by the right wing

        Way to go, dude, you played yourself.

        I’ve also seen his temper in his videos plus adding what he said in this video, I am convinced the guy should not be allowed to own a damm BBGun. But he’s lucky he doesnt live in a “communist state”. Yo what a shitshow.

        • dumpsterlid@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          22
          ·
          edit-2
          8 months ago

          I’ve also seen his temper in his videos plus adding what he said in this video, I am convinced the guy should not be allowed to own a damm BBGun. But he’s lucky he doesnt live in a “communist state”. Yo what a shitshow.

          You can see with these conservative white men when they clearly perceive a threatening universe everywhere they look based on their ideology. It is what directly leads to their irrational bouts of anger and violence, and causes things like…

          "A 14-year-old African-American boy stopped to ask for directions to school in a Detroit suburb but was shot at instead, according to prosecutors…I got to the house and I knocked on the lady’s door. Then she started yelling at me and she was like, ‘Why are you trying to break into my house?’ " Walker told local station WJBK. “And I was trying to explain to her that I was trying to get directions to Rochester High. And she kept yelling at me. The guy came downstairs, and then he grabbed the gun, and I saw it and started to run. And that’s when I heard the gunshot,” he told the station.

          the same old story over and over again

          Rightwing white men afraid of the world and thus ready to project anger and violence at the slightest confirmation of whatever dumb bullshit they believe in isn’t a cute look for any community, which is probably why these people tend to feel so isolated in the first place…

          • HappyRedditRefugee@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            10
            ·
            8 months ago

            Exactly. In a way there IS a “threat” for them, that they will not be anymore at the top of the pyramid, they see it as the “woke, communist, liberals” or whatever trying to subdue them, ironically what they want is to be able to further subdue everyone else.

            Also ironic and sad: poor (poor as in not rich) white men were never at the top, they were just as exploited as the rest, the are just made belive they weren’t. Of course they enjoy some extra perks, mostly judicial, but they have more in common with a poor black guy than with a millioner and nothing with a billioner

            What a world we have. But at the very least is never dull.

            • Ann Archy@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              8 months ago

              “But what about my illegally obtained riches and privileges? My family enslaved people for hundreds of years, I’m nobility, and you’re just going to come to my home and take what is not yours? What about MY rights? Don’t rock the boat, keep everything the way it’s always been, meaning that I can enjoy royal privileges at the expense of other people’s suffering, famine, violence, and death. Or are you a filthy COMMUNIST?!”

          • Overshoot2648@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            8 months ago

            It’s funny. I work with a bunch of righteimg guys a an energy cooperative which is pretty much light communism as it is collectively owned by the consumers without the ability for capital accumulation.

        • dantheclamman@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          14
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          8 months ago

          Some portions of the far right are allergic to being called “political”. Even outright Nazis often claim to be moderate. Part of the reason they end up having those beliefs is from a profound lack of awareness of self and others. They thus can convince themselves that they are the moderates, and everyone else is extreme

          • HappyRedditRefugee@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            10
            ·
            8 months ago

            Of course, is easier to maintain your belives if you see yourself as “moderate” or “apolitical”. Is easier if you belive your line of toughts are share by a “silent majority” thus making it reasonable and moderate.

            Just mental hops to affirm themselves.

            Sounds a bit like insecurity to me, they don’t see or feel themselves as in the position or capacity to justify what they belive in, so they refuge behind “Is just common sense” or “we are the majority”, “is not political”, basically a post modern rehash of the naturalistic argument.

        • Ann Archy@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          8 months ago

          Propaganda works as a motherfucker, it did 80 years ago, it did 800 years ago, it did 8000 years ago and it is fucking AI weaponized today.

          You want communism? Leave FOX on in your home at all times, you may not turn it off, you can lower the volume somewhat but it’s still on as you sleep, and if you disable it the dark men come and enable it again while you’re at work, and leave you with a little reminder and write your name in a little black leather bound notebook and tell your neighbors to report any suspicious behavior or they might be next up for a visit.

          To someone who has experience, the GOP is Stalinism in disguise. They don’t hate communists, they hate that they don’t get to be the oppressors. They are 100% the same shit.

      • half_built_pyramids@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        19
        ·
        8 months ago

        I had an interaction a few weeks ago where I made the same obvious statement – that everything is political, like the price of milk is political – and the someone said I was making it political, like gun rights.

        That conversation stopped there unfortunately, but it made me realize something.

        Politicized is different from political for a lot of people.

        Maybe most people realize the price of gas is political, but they don’t think that their internet bill, or whatever, is political. It’s just market forces to them, or whatever they assume about capitalism being good.

        Ultimately, I think my point is that when people say things like foss shouldn’t be political, I think they’re saying they agree, but they would lose their in-group status be agreeing with something “woke” like ethics in software. So they have to make a proxy argument about what is and isn’t political.

        • Ann Archy@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          8 months ago

          You know what solves this?

          Education.

          You know what this nation does not have?

          Education*.

          (* terms and conditions apply)

          • half_built_pyramids@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            8 months ago

            Agreed.

            Funny that I think you tapped into another politicized proxy argument here. People want their kids to get a good education, but they didn’t want it to be woke.

            Things were better when it was puritanical teaching and sex – and anything about sex – was bad and parents didn’t have to think about their little horny teenagers touching each other. Gross, right?

            Hence, book bans instead of education funding.

      • Socsa@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        This is like that time I discovered a dude who reviewed camping equipment and watched like ten of his videos and then all of a sudden it went from “top ten hatchets for the back country” to “Zionist lizard Jews are stealing our testosterone to make us compliant.”

        It took me months to convince YouTube to stop showing me anti woke content.

        • dumpsterlid@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          8 months ago

          Once YouTube decides you might be a good candidate for rightwing radicalization or conspiracy theories, good luck getting the algorithm to show you anything else lol. I am honestly surprised you even got the algorithm off that in 5 months. YouTube has permanently decided I am a good target to manipulate into conspiracies and rightwing content based on the fact that it has figured out I am a white man and I watch YouTube. Does it matter the only youtube political content I watch is leftist YouTube channels like the Majority Report? It does not.

        • Ann Archy@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          8 months ago

          I watched one guy’s channel where he travelled and filmed megalithic structures around the world, until out of the blue one day he just started ranting about wokeness and gays and soy liberals or whatever the fuck.

          I am so fucking done with literally both sides of that red herring being dangled in front of hyenas to keep them killing each other over the scraps instead of biting the hand that enslaves them.

      • Ann Archy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        There is zero correlation between technical acuity and moral maturity.

        Being good at doing something does not make you a moral person. It’s easy to get it wrong because society actually, consciously and ubiquitly promotes and reinforces the equivalence.

    • rambling_lunatic@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      8 months ago

      Just today I was reading some really concerning articles from Raymond along these lines.

      http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=8708 http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=8752

      "I had business outside today. I needed to go in towards Philly, closer to the riots, to get a new PSU put into the Great Beast. I went armed; I’ve been carrying at all times awake since Philadelphia started to burn and there were occasional reports of looters heading into the suburbs in other cities.

      I knew I might be heading into civil unrest today. It didn’t happen. But it still could.

      Therefore I’m announcing my rules of engagement should any of the riots connected with the atrocious murder of George Floyd reach the vicinity of my person.

      I will shoot any person engaging in arson or other life-threatening behavior, issuing a warning to cease first if safety permits. Blacks and other minorities are otherwise safe from my gun; they have a legitimate grievance in the matter of this murder, and what they’re doing to their own neighborhoods and lives will be punishment enough for the utter folly of their means of expression once the dust settles. White rioters, on the other hand, will be presumed to be Antifa Communists attempting to manipulate this tragedy for Communist political ends; them I consider “enemies-general of all mankind, to be dealt with as wolves are” and will shoot immediately, without mercy or warning. UPDATE: I didn’t mention white nationalists because I judge my chances of encountering any member of that tiny, ineffectual movement to be effectively zero, and I refuse to cooperate with the mass-media fiction that they are a significant factor in this crisis.

      We don’t have a problem with white nationalists attempting to burn down our country using black people as tools and proxies. We have a problem with Communists doing that. I insist on naming – and if necessary, shooting – the real enemy."

      -ESR

      Scratch a right-libertarian…

      • HappyRedditRefugee@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        8 months ago

        Man, that is some concerning shit, pardon my french. Really concerning shit.

        Im just speachless tbh. I talk a lot, you can see it in this threat, but I can only say about that, that it is some very concerning shit.

        Does he fancy himself to be Batman or what?

        • rambling_lunatic@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          8 months ago

          I think he fancied himself as what Rittenhouse fancied himself. If you check the dates, the “Rules for Rioters” post predates the Rittenhouse one.

          But yeah, it was concerning enough to even leave an Argentino friend of mine, who voted for Milei no less, speechless.

    • Socsa@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      I mean he basically admits that his beliefs structure is just following the herd and that he hasn’t put any effort into understanding philosophical first principles. I wouldn’t think about it too hard.

    • Ann Archy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      I think everyone should be able to own nerve gas.

      Not THIS guy, of course, but everyone else.

      • HappyRedditRefugee@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        8 months ago

        Hmmm… I never said that. You’re misreprensenting my words.

        Maybe what I meant is that there should be clear and hard rules for gun ownership? Maybe I did mean that only him should not be able to own one, perhaps I even meant that only people I agree with shoud own guns. Is not possible to for you to know what I generally believe about ownership and regulation only from my comment above. So please do not put words in my mouth.

        Also, bold statement comming from someone with a clear wink to Anarchy in their handle.

    • KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      17
      ·
      8 months ago

      i would argue that you probably lean more on the side of sharing user rights and freedoms generically. Rather than the more specific “software and ideas”

      You can certainly have different opinions relating to guns. But they do have a fundamental overlap of underlying concepts. Rights are rights at the end of the day. Either you have them. And they’re justified, or you don’t, and none of them are.

    • Lemmy@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      23
      ·
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      Well, that’s hard to do when your government are the only ones with guns and power.

      • Railcar8095@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        27
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        8 months ago

        Innocent lives lost due to “law abiding citizens” mishandling guns: a metric shit ton

        Corrupt governments toppled by gun lovers: 0

        The thought of how many people might be stocking ammo and thinking to use out if their favorite politician loses makes me happy for having an ocean between me and them.

        • Ann Archy@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          8 months ago

          You don’t understand. They mean they want to topple democratic societies in favor of theocratic fascism.

          Peace is the enemy.

          These fuckers never stopped waging the civil war, that’s what this is about and was ever all about.

        • KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          8 months ago

          Corrupt governments toppled by gun lovers: 0

          i mean, in a sense. That is why the US exists today. The british are well known gun fanatics.

        • Lemmy@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          17
          ·
          8 months ago

          What about the innocent lives lost because they didn’t have a gun? You think everyone can fight with their bare hands or a knife?

          • Urist@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            12
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            8 months ago

            Who do you even need to fight bro? If I was say getting mugged I would give them all my valuables save a 10 % tip that I could give them when I was allowed to run the hell away from there. Do not be a stupid macho idiot. Be a smart coward without neither a wallet, gun nor a fatal wound.

            Jokes aside, the main uptick is the smaller chance of someone less mentally stable than you with less to lose also having a gun.

            • Lemmy@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              7
              ·
              edit-2
              8 months ago

              So what about when you are getting raped? What about when someone doesn’t want to let you go? Do you know what its like to almost be murdered?

              If you want to say “Why do you even need to fight bro” you’re basically just saying good luck to all the people who can’t defend themselves and just letting them die. And do you not understand how regimes come to light? Just take a look at Russia, Putin just got to serve for another 6 years. Do you wonder how somebody stays in power for 24 years and more? Because nobody can fight back.

              • current@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                edit-2
                8 months ago

                Russia has pretty high gun ownership… comparable to Europe/Australia and not far from Canada. The US has like 4x the guns per capita as the next highest countries, and it’s far from the most free.

          • Cosmicomical@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            8
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            8 months ago

            Owning a gun makes you more likely to die by gun accident or by that gun being used against you. You logic is completely wrong.

            • Ann Archy@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              8 months ago

              You think these people care about logic? Wait until you hear who they are voting for and their reasoning for it.

          • Railcar8095@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            7
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            8 months ago

            If a country like the US had a lower violent dead per capita than other first world countries like France or Germany, I would agree with you. But given that the numbers are 3 to 6 times those of EU countries, it doesn’t seem to be working.

            Still, if you want to quantify how many lives were saved in any given year I can give you how many innocent ones were lost. Hard to measure, you say? Then it’s a weak arguments based on feelings not facts.

            • bcoffy@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              6
              ·
              edit-2
              8 months ago

              If a country like the US had a lower violent dead per capita than other first world countries like France or Germany, I would agree with you.

              It doesn’t have as high of a gun ownership rate as the US (no one does), but Czechia has some of the laxest gun laws in Europe, including allowing the concealed carry of a handgun like the US (at least 1 million Czechs have permits to own a firearm, a large portion of which conceal carry them for self defense) and they have a lower homicide rate than Germany or France (Source: World Bank)

              Even as a supporter of gun rights, I don’t think that definitively proves that guns, on a societal level, prevent deaths. I don’t believe that in general. I do believe, however, that on a personal level, a well trained individual who sees the need to defend themself or people they love can prevent harm by owning a firearm. I do also believe that in a society (America) with a broken policing system, and an increasingly authoritarian Republican party that wants to crack down on my rights and the rights of people I love, I’d like the option to protect myself and my friends/family.

              • Ann Archy@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                8 months ago

                The more knives people use, the more people get cut.

                More guns = more gun violence.

                How fucking hard is that to comprehend?

            • Ann Archy@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              8 months ago

              “We have dug this hole for ourselves so deep we can’t get out of it. At this point our chances are better if we keep digging straight down, it has to bottom out somewhere, right?”

              / The words of a truly dying society

          • Railcar8095@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            13
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            8 months ago

            Ahh, the typical Reddit old tradition of vague statement of knowledge with no meat to not be rebutted. Had hoped that didn’t reach Lemmy.

            Lightning round. Russia? Ha! China? Ha! North Korea? Japan? Ha! Netherlands? Hahahaha

            USA…? Hahahahahahhahahhaha

            • Urist@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              6
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              8 months ago

              The US might prove true if you include gun nuts toppling their own government by voting for fascist scum.

        • Rediphile@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          8
          ·
          8 months ago

          I struggle to see Japan as a bastion of freedom lol. Fun place to visit for sure, but between the archaic drug laws and suicide forests I’m not sure they are a society others should be modeling themselves after.

      • Ann Archy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        8 months ago

        It’s better when it’s the government with guns against criminals, randos, and children with guns.

        More guns is always the solution. If it only causes more violence and bloodshed like a tribal civil war in the jungle then you clearly did not get enough guns.

        Plus, they’re FUN! People forget that it’s FUN to shoot guns. Isn’t that worth a dysfunctional society crippled by violence and murder?

        • Lemmy@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          8 months ago

          Since your on board with the government only having guns, then please explain to me how Putin has stayed in power for the last 24 years? What about Nazi Germany?

    • mexicancartel@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      8 months ago

      This GNU/GUN is distributed in the hope that it will be useful, but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY. IN NO EVENT UNLESS REQUIRED BY APPLICABLE LAW OR AGREED TO IN WRITING WILL ANY COPYRIGHT HOLDER, OR ANY OTHER PARTY WHO MODIFIES AND/OR CONVEYS THE PROGRAM AS PERMITTED ABOVE, BE LIABLE TO YOU FOR DAMAGES, INCLUDING ANY GENERAL, SPECIAL, INCIDENTAL OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES ARISING OUT OF THE USE OR INABILITY TO USE THE PROGRAM (INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO LOSS OF DATA OR DATA BEING RENDERED INACCURATE OR LOSSES SUSTAINED BY YOU OR THIRD PARTIES OR A FAILURE OF THE PROGRAM TO OPERATE WITH ANY OTHER PROGRAMS), EVEN IF SUCH HOLDER OR OTHER PARTY HAS BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES.

      • ArcaneSlime@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        26
        ·
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        Yeah you think. They’ve come a long way since Cody Wilson’s proof of concept dubbed “The Liberator.” Check out the 3011 or Hoffman lowers, or the FGC9 “Bob” rest JSTARK’s soul.

  • varnia@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    56
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    8 months ago

    I knew something was off, I never really could watch his channel for some reason. This is one more hint that my intuition wasn’t wrong.

    • FatCat@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      20
      arrow-down
      10
      ·
      8 months ago

      Thats fine, but I also would argue against this kind of purity testing. Where a person is written off because they disagree with you on one or two issue. There are a lot of colorful characters in the community so you would quickly end up very alone…

      I think overall DT is a good advocate for FOSS.

      • cybersandwich@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        I like this point of view. I struggle with it myself. It’s the reason I didn’t watch this video when he released it. I didn’t want to write him off. He’s made a few comments here or there over the years that has let me glean some info where he just seems like he’d be a tackleberry mall ninja type (works loss prevention/aka mall cop).

        But maybe he isn’t, and regardless, I watched his videos for the FOSS content and he really doesnt get political(usually …this video was out of left field). I try to separate the “art from the artist” so to speak.

        That said, I wish “artists” didn’t make that so difficult.

      • ulterno@lemmy.kde.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        8 months ago

        For some reason, I feel like he would look better posing with a wooden-body hunting or sniper rifle.

    • Captain Aggravated@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      8 months ago

      I started watching DistroTube several years ago, seemed like a fairly straightforward guy, would do a few tutorials on Linux commands, aggregated FOSS headlines, did a full install of Arch in real time once.

      Then one day on his channel he told a story. Apparently he worked in a retail environment, and was accused by a customer, a “minority” as he put it, of “following her around the store.” He made a pretty big point that he responded to his manager “thanks for letting me know.”

      suspicious eye squint

      Then he told the story or going to a Trump rally.

      Yeah he’s a right-wing nutjob. Surprised he hasn’t hurt anyone yet.

    • fruitycoder@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      His rant on Mozilla’s “We need to do more than deplatforming” was my last straw. He raked them over the coals for a title and never read a word from the article.

      I’m pro FOSS, and pro gun. I just can’t stand people that do no effort and use there platforms to sow division though.

    • FrowingFostek@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      I wonder if the pentagon has ran a simulation to quantify how many guns exactly.

      Like hey, if x million of this class of people get armed, it would make things x levels of difficult to quash.

      • mojofrododojo@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        8 months ago

        we already have far more guns that people in the US. How many guns does it take to reach the levels you’re talking about? 5 guns per person?

        • Cryophilia@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          8 months ago

          Probably at least 3, but evenly distributed among the population. Currently guns are concentrated in the hands of just a few people.

          • mojofrododojo@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            8 months ago

            Probably at least 3

            ok so extrapolate the rise in gun violence with YET MORE FIREARMS.

            Man, I love the art and science of firearms and learning to use a new system. I thoroughly enjoyed the range while I was in the military and though I wasn’t infantry, took it seriously and appreciated the skill it takes to employ weapons of war to make war on our enemies.

            Let’s look at the 2a: A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

            2a nutbags will tell you none of the first dozen words count. Look at the situation we have today. Help me make ‘more guns are the answer’ make sense man.

            • Cryophilia@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              5
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              8 months ago

              Hey dude, you asked a question and I answered. That wasn’t an invitation to get on your soap box.

              • mojofrododojo@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                5
                ·
                8 months ago

                well your answer is nutbags if you live in the USA. sorry I had a retort to your uninformed / wildly delusional idea of an even more armed US being desirable. sorry if the points I presented prompted some kind of difficulty in your reasoning chum.

        • FrowingFostek@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          8 months ago

          I see what you’re saying but, I feel like Milton and the ghouls would just come after the fact. Shock doctrine and all that jazz happens in the wreckage of the act.

  • Honytawk@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    53
    arrow-down
    19
    ·
    8 months ago

    Bahaha

    Yes, because the free use of software conflates with wanting everyone (including the lunatics) armed with deadly weapons running around the places you try to live.

    These Muricans really have such ignorant view on the world. I doubt they have ever left their hometown, let alone visited actual developed nations with real gun laws.

  • Kostyeah@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    37
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    8 months ago

    I dont think I’m American enough to understand this. How does wanting people to have freedom to use their systems as they please correlate with everyone being able to own and freely carry weapons that can kill instantly?

    • Camelbeard@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      8 months ago

      Yeah it’s like saying if you support free software, you support companies to not pay taxes or companies putting nicotine in products.

    • KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      15
      ·
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      to put it blatantly. Pro 2A people (they should, on paper at least, in practice a significant portion of them are cunts and shouldn’t be allowed in the community but that’s a different rant all together) support the idea that people have rights. specifically to do with guns.

      There is a very fundamental overlap in the whole “i believe i should be able to run whatever software i want, with no restrictions” and “i believe i should be allowed to own guns with minimal restrictions” crowds. It’s that simple, doesn’t matter whether you agree with it or not. If you’re a linux user, and you support open source software, and believe users should have rights. You automatically have a pretty significant moral overlap with pro 2A people. (on paper, again, fuck it, im ranting about it)

      Also, minor nitpick, they don’t kill instantly, they certainly can. But if i shoot you in the toe, you probably won’t keel over and die immediately. That’s a gross mischaracterization of them.

      The following is a tangential rant, feel free to ignore, it’s about gun owners being cunts. There is a non insignificant portion of the gun community who, when presented with the concept of “everybody should be taught gun safety, because it’s a right granted to us” relating specifically to (liberals edit, i misspoke here, i meant republicans, LOL) (go figure) happen to get really fucking antsy at the thought of people they don’t like owning guns.

      Now i feel like i don’t have to explain why this is maybe a very bad thing. But to put it bluntly, there are two good solutions here. Ban guns forever, permanently (which i disagree with, but that’s just my opinion on it) or, make it accessible to everybody, and give everyone access to them, and the materials required to be safe and responsible with them. Because after all, gun safety, is what keeps us safe when using them. While im sure the latter would make some amount of gun owning republicans uneasy, i propose they get a taste of their own fucking medicine.

      • mojofrododojo@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        8 months ago

        it has fuck all to do with " people they don’t like owning guns." it has fucking everything to do with people unqualified and unsafe to own guns being able to obtain guns - whether through gun show loopholes, straw buyers, no yellow/red flag laws, etc.

        fuck outa here with liberals getting antsy bullshit. if you weren’t paying attention, there’s a fucking gun violence epidemic going on, every fucking week there’s another mass shooting.

        if that’s liberals getting antsy, maybe you should fucking wake up and realize this bullshit only happens here. bellend.

        • linuxPIPEpower@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          8 months ago

          It’s written in a messy way but I actually read it the opposite way.

          There is a non insignificant portion of the gun community who, when presented with the concept of “everybody should be taught gun safety, because it’s a right granted to us” relating specifically to liberals (go figure) happen to get really fucking antsy at the thought of people they don’t like owning guns.

          I think what @KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com meant was that the 2A people don’t seem to be very interested in defending gun rights for people outside their circles. I don’t know if I’d use liberals as the example here. I think Black people would be far more salient.

          Did the NRA Support a 1967 ‘Open Carry’ Ban in California? | Snopes.com

          While 1967 was a long time ago, the “antsiness” has remained. How often do you hear of these people doing anything to defend the people who are the primary targets of anti gun laws? Which is, by a large margin, Black and other racialized people.

          I heard an interview with some Public Defenders who had submitted an amicus brief in relation to a guns rights case on the basis that even though the actual case was stupid, changing the law would materially improve the lives of overincarcerted communities. I thought it was on 5-4 podcast in follow up to the first ep that covered the case in a less friendly way: New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v. Bruen. I don’t find the subsequent ep where they had the PDs on for an interview… maybe it was taken down.

          • mojofrododojo@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            8 months ago

            Reagan and the NRA were all about gun control when it was Black Panthers.

            I just want sane controls preventing nutbags from acquiring arsenals. I’m not anti-gun, I’m a prior service gun loving person who’s watching the idiots ruin it for the rest of us.

            • KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              8 months ago

              i wish it was less about posturing, and more about the underlying fundamental reasons.

              You’re a republican that owns a gun, that’s cool, i didn’t ask, lets go do something that we can enjoy together instead.

                • KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  8 months ago

                  that article is cool and all, but please try to explain to me how the intrinsic and very explicit link, between republican politics, and 2A, isn’t political posturing in some manner.

                  You may not be. But there is a very clear tie between the conservative rhetoric, and 2A. If it weren’t political posturing the issues that i was talking about, which do exist (go have a look at some of the comments on this video), would not be happening. As it wouldn’t fucking matter.

                • KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  8 months ago

                  to be clear, i wasn’t referring to you specifically in that statement. It was a generic expression intended to make my point more obvious.

                  Also what issue? Gun violence? Yeah that’s an issue. I’m not hear to talk about that though.

          • KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            8 months ago

            this pretty much. I used liberals specifically because that was an actual example of where i had seen it crop up. It applies broadly to “people they don’t like” however.

            My main complaint here was that people who supposedly defend the rights that everybody have, get hypocritical about it, when presented with something that counters their personal beliefs. Directly contradicting their whole argument related to 2A.

        • KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          8 months ago

          it has fuck all to do with " people they don’t like owning guns." it has fucking everything to do with people unqualified and unsafe to own guns being able to obtain guns - whether through gun show loopholes, straw buyers, no yellow/red flag laws, etc.

          you misunderstood my point here. The problem here is people who support 2A, and then immediately double back when presented with a group of people they don’t vibe with and go “uhm, ok, maybe they shouldn’t have guns, i think”

          fuck outa here with liberals getting antsy bullshit. if you weren’t paying attention, there’s a fucking gun violence epidemic going on, every fucking week there’s another mass shooting.

          that was a typo, lol, i skill issued. My bad.

      • Johnmannesca@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        8 months ago

        Gun people and Open Source people both can appreciate the right to repair, although Americans, particularly southerners, have a certain tendency to have more gunowners across the land than people who can libreboot a chromebook. Both groups of people can use their devices for good or bad, and I think that was the original message the oop failed to relay; I don’t really know what they think they’re saying.

        • KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          8 months ago

          you’ve got the right idea. I was going a little more fundamental though. More along the lines of “we have the right to libreboot a chromebook if we wish” just as they “have the right to own a gun legally, if they wish”

          From that standpoint they’re very similar, and tie in to a lot of the same underlying points.

      • SendMePhotos@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        8 months ago

        I see what you’re saying… I’m picking up what you’re putting down…

        There’s an overlap of free rights to freedom and free rights to guns, but I think that they’re on different fields.

        I agree with you, surprisingly, about a lot of what you said. But guns are a weird subject for a lot of people. The issue that is always brought up is that guns are designed to kill. The counter is good safety foundation, training, and practice. The counter to that is, humans are stupid greedy assholes.

        For the sake of conversation, I’m mixed. I have guns myself but I treat them with respect. My kids know how to handle them and can cite the rules of gun ownership. The guns are locked up at all times. My family does the same. I can’t imagine that everyone is doing the same thing.

        Jordan Klepper noted that a firm overlap on both sides is stricter regulatory control of deeper background checks, but the NRA makes this impossible. Jordan Klepper Solves Guns.

        • KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          8 months ago

          I agree with you, surprisingly, about a lot of what you said. But guns are a weird subject for a lot of people. The issue that is always brought up is that guns are designed to kill. The counter is good safety foundation, training, and practice. The counter to that is, humans are stupid greedy assholes.

          like wise you could argue that censorship resistant platforms, self hosting, and e2e encryption can cause acts of violence to be carried out against people. I don’t see anybody complaining about that though, that’s just an understood cause and effect of having freedom in regards to censorship. Shitty people exist, they will proceed to be shitty. You can censor them, but if you want to maintain truly uncensored speech, you must allow them to speak, unfortunately.

          There is always a benefit, and a negative to any action taken. Guns can indeed kill people, you can argue they were made to kill, but you can also argue that the vast majority of guns in existence have never once killed a person. And therefore, statistically, are probably safer than a lot of other things. Like eating junk food.

          Like you said, you treat guns with respect, because they can be dangerous, much like someone who interacts with powertools on the regular, understands the dangers of powertools, and how they can be used to hurt people, intentionally or otherwise. Just like when creating open source software, or using it, you have to respect it’s licensing, and use it appropriately.

          The lack of respect is certainly a problem, but it is drastically upset when republicans, who disproportionately, understand gun safety, and utilize it to their benefit (as they should) don’t want to educate people they don’t find very appealing on how to be safe with them. Which not only leads to potential self inflicted dangers and injuries, but also potentially to others as well. If we want everyone to be safe and respectful of guns, we can’t simply ignore an entire segment of the population, it just doesn’t matter. You can’t justify that.

          putting them on different fields is certainly understandable, they are different things after all, but i think it’s important to consider the underlying structures and mechanisms behind something, and seeing how those can be effectively applied elsewhere, if for no other reason than to prevent bias and hypocrisy. As well as ensuring consistent beliefs. Seeing as a non-insignificant portion of gun owning republicans seem to be experiencing this issue right now. I would say that’s fair.

        • havokdj@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          6
          ·
          8 months ago

          I know this is about to sound stupid but I promise it isn’t as dumb as it sounds.

          Guns are not designed to kill, nothing is designed to kill. Guns were designed to propel a projectile at incredible velocities, they were INVENTED to kill. What you do with the gun is what makes the difference.

          • KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            8 months ago

            i’ve never really found that argument compelling tbh. Guns are designed to kill.

            So are knives, and machetes. And daggers, swords, etc… Nobody ever complains about those. Mostly because they have other uses, and aren’t in particularly heavy use.

            I mean hell, you could argue a car is designed to kill people. F150s are a big contender there.

            • havokdj@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              8 months ago

              So you mean to tell me that knives and machetes are primarily used to kill people every day instead of cutting rope, vines, etc?

              Cars were designed to kill people? Is that why the 1894 velo was designed? To kill people? Definitely not designed to transport people I guess. If you walk in front of a train going even 15 mph, your corpse would be so destroyed that it would not even be recognizable. Are trains designed to kill then?

              Hell, by your logic, anything that has the capability to kill is designed to kill, did you know that if you drink too much water, you can die? Guess water’s designed to kill too, I guess.

              Guns have uses besides killing, the very presence of a firearm is a deterrant, that alone is a purpose that is given besides killing. I don’t agree with it, and I don’t even think everyone should just have easy access to firearms, but they definitely work for that purpose. Mentally unstable folks, it won’t work on those, but is that really the fault of guns themselves, or our country’s lackluster healthcare system, especially with the stigma around seeking mental help? A lack of access to guns is not going to stop someone from trying to kill someone, I am telling you that it is not. At the end of the day, external factors like economical reasons, mental health problems, stress related factors such as family issues, social issues, or work related issues, that’s what even drives people to do crimes like mass shootings in the first place.

              Honestly, I could give less of a shit if guns even got taken away, but at the end of the day, there is still a problem to be dealt with and that is people who need help are not getting it, and as a result, are suffering.

              • KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                8 months ago

                So you mean to tell me that knives and machetes are primarily used to kill people every day instead of cutting rope, vines, etc?

                Cars were designed to kill people? Is that why the 1894 velo was designed? To kill people? Definitely not designed to transport people I guess. If you walk in front of a train going even 15 mph, your corpse would be so destroyed that it would not even be recognizable. Are trains designed to kill then?

                Hell, by your logic, anything that has the capability to kill is designed to kill, did you know that if you drink too much water, you can die? Guess water’s designed to kill too, I guess.

                this is exactly my point. It’s such a broad and wide reaching statement, that it completely excludes sport, and hunting. As well as defense, from what guns were designed to do. It’s just frankly a stupid statement to make.

          • SendMePhotos@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            8 months ago

            That is the controversy about them. Essentially they’re super fast slingshots.

            Again, I agree. It comes down to rights though.

            Guns, to me, could maybe be paired with cars. You don’t need cars. Nobody needs to go that fast. Cars kill people. Cars ruin the environment. Etc.

            • havokdj@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              8 months ago

              Pretty much lol. At the end of the day, an object that you use with a purpose is a tool, what you use that tool to accomplish, i.e. running someone over with a car, bashing someone’s head in with a hammer, or shooting someone with a gun, that’s what is important. I won’t comment on the gun rights thing because I honestly think I’ve spent too much time in my life talking about it, but I think something that gets overlooked that could help alleviate the problem is widespread mental healthcare and awareness!

              Unfortunately, that will probably never happen though.

  • taanegl@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    37
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    edit-2
    8 months ago

    You do know there are left wing people out there who own guns and go to the range, right? Because when them nationalists show up in their leather boots, knocking on doors, they won’t give a damn if you’re a pacificist. They gonna go pop-pop-pop.

    Learn from the black panthers. If proliferation of guns is the standard, abstaining will only make you - and your children - a juicier target.

    But, even if you’re anti-guns, there’s one more thing.

    One talking point you could use with pro-gun people though, even if you’re anti-gun…

    “So let me get this straight… you’re against the government taking away your guns, but for the government taking away your encryption?”

    Say it with me now:

    THE RIGHT TO ENCRYPT SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED

    • blazera@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      25
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      8 months ago

      US is a great example that guns dont stop guns. they just turn escalations into dice rolls for who gets to die

      • Urist@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        8 months ago

        You obviously need a gun with the same caliber bullet to stop an incoming gun shot. Have you not even read Newton’s laws of motion?

  • merthyr1831@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    29
    ·
    8 months ago

    There are actually a few open source gun designs, namely designed to circumvent gun control measures by being built from off the shelf parts with limited machining.

    The one I’ve seen most of is the FGC-9 that’s being used by rebels in Myanmar to be used in raids against government troops, after which they can be replaced with scavenged conventional small arms.

    • Hildegarde@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      8 months ago

      The gun’s name is an initialism for “Fuck Gun Control”, with the “9” referencing its 9mm cartridge.

      They’ve got the best branding

        • ArcaneSlime@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          8 months ago

          Actually it’s less of a sidearm more of a pistol calibre carbine chambered in 9mm, and the dude that made it “mysteriously died” in german police custody so no more from him.

          • current@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            8 months ago

            Apparently he actually died in his car 2 days after a fruitless police raid, allegedly of “heart attack”.

          • merthyr1831@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            8 months ago

            the dude that made it “mysteriously died” in german police custody so no more from him.

            Not that it matters, there’s a bunch of people I’ve seen working on rifle-caliber 3D printed weapons now.

            Hell, I follow some folks on Twitter who were developing handmade anti tank launchers (which are actually legal for certain US States if they’re registered with the govt lmao). Definitely not going to get glowied any time soon im sure.

            • ArcaneSlime@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              8 months ago

              The main difference is JSTARK was German and was snitched on by an Englishman, who I’d bet is the guy who filmed that piece on him for Popular Front that slimy bastard. (Also turns out he died two days after the raid not in custody, my bad!)

              All that is for sure legal stateside! (Well unless CA, NJ…)

  • Swarfega@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    31
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    8 months ago

    I read the title before looking at the guy and he looks exactly like the sort of person who would write that title