this post was submitted on 20 Jun 2025
1259 points (98.8% liked)
Microblog Memes
8193 readers
3561 users here now
A place to share screenshots of Microblog posts, whether from Mastodon, tumblr, ~~Twitter~~ X, KBin, Threads or elsewhere.
Created as an evolution of White People Twitter and other tweet-capture subreddits.
Rules:
- Please put at least one word relevant to the post in the post title.
- Be nice.
- No advertising, brand promotion or guerilla marketing.
- Posters are encouraged to link to the toot or tweet etc in the description of posts.
Related communities:
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Where's the well regulated militia you Americans scream about so loudly when someone suggests not letting a mentally ill child own an assault rifle?
Isn't this exactly the government tyranny that argument is used to defend against?
A lot of these areas have much more stringent gun laws. Yes, they can own the guns, but they can't carry them. Carrying/displaying will probably get them arrested and charged with a weapons felony.
I'm usually told we've moved beyond the need for people to do that. Then we should just leave the use of force to the police: The organizations that consistently seem to try to prove we can't trust them. I agree, the police should be an organization Americans can trust: How can we make them that way?
Does anyone see the irony?
The U.S. never fixed their trust issues with police. So this seems like the logical result.
I think they’re the same people that are locking up random immigrants
Quit calling them immigrants, they’re illegal aliens invading the U.S.
Your family were invaders too boss, I don't remember inviting anyone over to genocide the native population do you?
This has been asked many, many times. Most of them are on Drumpy's side. The same fucks on Jan6.
So, one could argue that the well regulated militia in question is constituted by the National Guard, as they nominally are the armed forces of individual States, and can be nationalized under certain circumstances.
Except for the fact that Trump just nationalized the California National Guard when he's nominally not supposed to....
One should argue that. Even though the national guard acts as a branch of the military, technically they are whats considered a "organized milita" and are actually under the control of the state government
The way the legal system in the US works is just incredible. There are things that are very much illegal, but if the president does them apparently everyone is just fine with it.
The majority of citizens are not "fine" with it, we are watching the results of the capture of every branch of government.
The template for this actually played out in Texas. Texas has a very weak governors office in terms of formal powers. Under George W Bush the Republican party systematically took control of each state office and coordinated their efforts to effect the agenda of Bush, Perry, and now Abbott.
They are doing the same thing at the federal level with project 2025 under Trump, they took the supreme court, and now they have removed the career civil servants that would refuse illegal orders from Trump.
If history of other dictatorships is any guide the powers of ICE will be expanded steadily and the other law enforcement agencies and military will be continually overshadowed by ICE and eventually subordinated to them, like the Republican guard of Iran or the SS in Nazi Germany.
They're too busy gargling republican boot to bother rising up against the tyranny they've cried about for decades.
To a unnerving amount of people's surprise, they only cared about the power of the state when they thought it was being used improperly (having a tolerant democracy), and are more than happy to see it used the way they want (hurting brown people)
It'll come for them at the finish. These brown shirts should pick up a history book. The people who helped the Nazis rise to power did not live to get to enjoy it.
This is quite a terse way of putting it.
10/10. No notes.
Yes. Nobody wants to be first because they and the next xx% will be the sacrifice.
if it's not the home of the brave, it won't be the land of the free
Hey dumbass, it turns out that:
Each state has its own laws about this. Where I live the same state constitution that ALSO specifically grants us the right to own firearms for self defense explicitly forbids belonging to any private militia.
My part (Democrats) is so overwhelmingly anti gun that 99% of aren’t armed to begin with. So precious militia you’re smugly pretending to ask about? Yeah you’re looking at them in the post to begin with. They’re all boot licking fascists.
Nice try though, pretending disarming Americans is the answer to anything other than more deportations, more oppression, and so on.
I’ll give you this: literally neither side gives a shit about the actual underlying problem: mental health. Over half of ALL gun deaths in the USA each year are from suicide. You don’t need an AR15 for that. Banning and removing all guns successfully won’t stop all those people wanting to be dead, but my fellow Democrats don’t care and the fascists sure don’t.
LOL. My point was, when you have come down of your high horse, that the opponents of gun control hide behind the Second Amendment and the need to protect themselves from government overreach, but those are the exact same people who jump up to volunteer to do that exact bit of overreach.
Plus I get to have a little dig at your country's ridiculous gun laws at the same time.
What? That doesn't even make any sense. Anti-Gun folks continually make laws against the second amendment (Imo, I know this is gonna get a lot of flack here but that's not the point.
The second amendment protects the rights of civilians owning guns. And folks who are pro-gun tend to overwhelmingly lean right after years of bastardization from the left.
Maybe actually read the second amendment, and the arguments made by both parties before you "take a little dig"
Those 2a chuds will never rise up against a tyrannical government.
They'd rather kneel down for a tyrannical government.
The thing that I don't get about those people is, what do they think the "well regulated" part means?
Do you actually want an answer? I think you know the details aren’t suitable for a public forum.