Not a peep from the second amendment types. Curious.
If that was true, that is why.
Now in reality, that was not true, they stood with nazi cause they themselves are nazi who want to bully others.
I can gauge how much of an authoritarian you are with one simple question, is it immoral to privately own the means of production?
You keep using the term authoritarian but I don't think you actually know what it means.
And they were go to example of important free speech for years. The gauge was always defending nazi free speech, never defending communist free speech, radical feminists free speech or whoever else free speech.
Your question supposed to determine authoritanianism shows the same fallacy - nazi and other fascists wont count as an authoritarian. If I think all women should be locked at home and be under control of husbands, you wont count me as authoritarian either.
That's enough for me.
But I'm pleased you live up to your profile name.
All best,
On the other hand, there's not an apparent principled reason why the government's actions here wouldn't fall under the arguments made by the 2A advocates that the parent is referring to. Therefore, it appears to be hypocracy.
That being said, I run in fairly left wing crowds and the idea of passing hate speech laws almost never comes up. I'm sure that there are people who would support that, but there simply isn't any meaningful movement to actually try to make it happen.
the 2nd amendment (the entire Bill of Rights) was written to protect us from our own government, but it’s way more convenient to just shoot brown people or people who speak a different language.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mulford_Act
Just to add color to your comment. These folks were directly exercising 2nd amendment rights against oppressive state forces and that Act was the response to them exercising it.
The leftist gun community is mostly focused on arming the LGBTQ community at the moment though. Your chances of getting canoed while trying to stab a trans woman are way up over the past couple years.
This paper is heavily rejected by mainstream criminologists. It relies on victim memorial lists for a count of victims and it relies on a database made by an anti-Trans group for the perpetrator count. This leads to both a significant undercount of victims and overcount of perpetrators.
The ONS has come out against it and said that official homicide data does not track transgender status so there is no official data to back this research up on.
None of this has stopped rightwingers from heavily circulating this paper of course. Somehow I doubt science is the goal here.
It wasn’t self defense, it wasn’t for recreational fun, it is to provide a physical check on government overreach. Therefore it’s sensible to discuss it during times of government overreach.
But they'll still lecture you should you ever dare question the utility and necessity of it. They'll still claim their guns are the only thing holding America back from tyranny even as ICE and the police pick them off like ducks.
(disclaimer: this is not my opinion I'm just explaining their logic)
Some people view the actions of ICE, like in this article, to be crossing a line that would normally provoke a response from second amendment types.
it might listen, and turn...