this post was submitted on 28 Apr 2025
19 points (88.0% liked)

politics

23594 readers
3457 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

• Register To Vote

• Citizenship Resource Center

• Congressional Awards Program

• Federal Government Agencies

• Library of Congress Legislative Resources

• The White House

• U.S. House of Representatives

• U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

• News

• World News

• Business News

• Political Discussion

• Ask Politics

• Military News

• Global Politics

• Moderate Politics

• Progressive Politics

• UK Politics

• Canadian Politics

• Australian Politics

• New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
outrageousmatter@lemmy.world
aidan@lemmy.world
jordanlund@lemmy.world
little_cow@lemmy.world
Theonetheycall1845@lemmy.world
JuBe@lemmy.world
Lasherz12@lemmy.world
19
Bills aiming to relax gun control receive public comment in Augusta (Maine) (www.wabi.tv)
submitted 3 weeks ago by Modern_medicine_isnt@lemmy.world to c/politics@lemmy.world
4 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

This article got me thinking that maybe blue states "should" pause or relax some gun controls and say it is because they think the people may need to defend themselves from a fascist government. They could add in some subsidized gun saftey classes in the same bill.

The concept is symbolic mostly. It may give people like ICE agents a little less confidence when they do a raid because it seems more dangerous to them. And if things get really ugly, it could arguably be a deterrent. Ideally national guard troops ordered into a blue state might refuse such an order because they expect armed resistance that would force them to shoot civilians. Where as right now, they would expect no or very little civilian resistance. And that possibility might deter the feds from ordering troops in because they don't want to risk the order being refused.

At the end of the day. Most americans don't want Americans killing each other. So anything we can do to make that less appetizing to the people in charge that don't care about Americans, the better.

top 4 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Carmakazi@lemmy.world 3 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (3 children)

In America there are tens if not hundreds of millions more guns than there are people. Any amount of "incentive" for Americans to buy even more guns is just pissing into an ocean of piss. The people who want guns already have one, or two, or 30. The exception being teens coming of legal age.

None of this has deterred the neo-Gestapo from goosestepping as of yet.

The real problem with your proposal is that it is a clear signal of treasonous intent against the FedGov from any state that passes it. They will immediately start arresting state officials no matter how coy you play it.

[–] BrianTheeBiscuiteer@lemmy.world 4 points 3 weeks ago

At this point, not arming up for fear of reprisal is just as ridiculous as not criticizing the government for fear of reprisal. Use your fucking rights or lose them.

[–] Modern_medicine_isnt@lemmy.world 4 points 3 weeks ago

I duuno. Washington passed that bill making it illegal for troops ftom other states to enter washington. The intent there is pretty clear. Noone got arrested.

And it isn't about the reality of the number of guns. It's about the news that the state did the thing. Maybe it only results in 5 more guns being bought. But if the perception is that the civilians are armed and intend to defend, that acts as the deterrent.

[–] Corkyskog@sh.itjust.works 3 points 3 weeks ago

Some people own a lot of guns, that's a very misleading stat. Only 32% of adult Americans own guns. That's also about the percent of eligible voters who voted for Trump.

Mamy blue states discourage gun ownership and so do Democrats. In some democratic circles gun ownership is seen as being on the other team.