• yeather@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    16
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    7 months ago

    The white supremacists usually have a large number of firearms and actively use the second amendment. When aplied at other protests (see earty capital hill occupations) a similar response happens with police being more stand offish and refusing to take ground until absolutely necessary.

    • kakes@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 months ago

      The white supremacists usually have a large number of firearms and actively use the second amendment.

      Seems like the perfect situation for a hyper-militarized police force to me.

      (Not to say I think the government should deploy a proto-military force against protests, but like, if they’re doing it anyway…)

      • yeather@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        7 months ago

        You’re right, but in most situations any casualties are unacceptable. The police will minimize their presence if they believe the people protesting have the conviction to use firearms against them. This is ehy the second amendment is so important, as defense for every other amendment against the corrupt and tyrannical.

        • kakes@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          7 months ago

          I’m not American, but from my perspective, the modern interpretation of your second amendment seems to cause way more oppression than it relieves in practice.

          Also, if there is a group of people with the “conviction” to kill other people with lethal force, that would be exactly where police should be getting involved.

          Getting a bit off-topic, but since you brought it up I’d be remiss not to respond.

          • yeather@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            7 months ago

            Your thinking is sonewhat correct. A group with firearms and the heart to use them would be a threat if the first response is to shoot. In most cases however the protest attempts to remain peaceful. Also, in many cases, only a small percentage have that conviction, but that small amount scares the police enough to keep them back.

          • Bytemeister@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            Ελληνικά
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            7 months ago

            The real irony is that the 2nd amendment is ineffective against a tyrannical government, and things that are effective (making bombs, molotovs, weaponized consumer drones) are pretty explicitly banned.

      • masquenox@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        7 months ago

        Seems like the perfect situation for a hyper-militarized police force to me.

        So you want more fascism?

        • kakes@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          7 months ago

          Not to say I think the government should deploy a proto-military force against protests, but like, if they’re doing it anyway…

    • grue@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 months ago

      When aplied at other protests (see earty capital hill occupations)…

      …some other random fascist murders them instead, and then gets pardoned by Governor Abbott for it.

    • masquenox@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      7 months ago

      May have something to do with the fact that the police is about as fascist an institution as institutions get.