this post was submitted on 08 Feb 2025
185 points (97.0% liked)

politics

20365 readers
3310 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
 

An executive order issued Friday by President Donald Trump that aims to rollback gun control measures instituted by his predecessor received swift rebuke from critics who said the order should be seen as a giveaway to the profit-hungry gun industry at the expense of a society ruthlessly harmed by gun violence year after year after year.

top 21 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] cabron_offsets@lemmy.world 29 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Why do you think Putin bought him?

[–] foggy@lemmy.world 24 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

When you look at Donald Trump as a Trojan horse in the cold war, everything makes sense.

[–] MothmanDelorian@lemmy.world 4 points 2 weeks ago

My university education was largely targeting the US diplomatic response to the downfall of the USSR and the rise of the CIS. One of my professors was ex-KGB who worked with the Stasi in East Germany and was a spy for MI-5. He mentioned on more than one occasion that his former colleagues were very angry over the loss of the ColdWar and many would want revenge. I believe this is that revenge.

[–] SupraMario@lemmy.world 28 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

None of those policies stop mass shootings. They're just virtue signaling from anti-2a groups.

Do something meaningful for once that doesn't target trying to magically make murder somehow more illegal.

Put the time and political capital into things that actually would change our society.

Single payer healthcare, so people can get mental health without going broke and avoiding it. Or turning to suicide, which is 2/3rds of our firearm deaths.

Reform prisoners, not lock them away for forever and rob them of ever being a productive member of society.

Get rid of for profit prisons, so we're not turning an addict into someone who gets out of prison and can't get a job because they carry a felony.

End qualified immunity so the 1/40 gun deaths aren't from police who just kill people and get away with it.

Increase our school funding 10 fold. Build more schools, so class sizes can be 10-15 kids max per teacher. Not 30-40+

Solidify abortion rights into law, why the hell it's been left to the courts for so long is insane. More unwanted children doesn't create mentally stable people.

The list of shit that actually could stop mass shootings is a mile long...but bullshit laws aren't going to have any effect on it. Remember, Columbine happened during the AWB

[–] LePoisson@lemmy.world 2 points 2 weeks ago

Agree with doing all that.

I still feel like some more regulations and laws could help. It's simply too easy to purchase firearms in the USA. Personally I'd like to see it more akin to how we license and regulate motor vehicles. I want people to need a license to purchase a firearm, and that license includes getting firearm safety instruction, a background check that's better than the current one we have in place, and requiring a range qualification too.

It would really help if people were better educated on guns in general, at the very least I think it'd help cut down on accidental gun deaths and suicides.

[–] corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca 2 points 2 weeks ago

Remember, Columbine happened during the AWB

Likewise, I still had leaks after plugging half the holes in my boat. I couldn't explain it !

[–] hddsx@lemmy.ca 17 points 2 weeks ago (3 children)

He’s rolling back gun regulation?

So that means we’ll have the right weapons to counter the SS coming door to door to look for “illegals”?

[–] Banana@sh.itjust.works 7 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

Yeah i was thinking it's awfully stupid (good for the people) of him to arm the proletariat...

[–] prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

A civil war is good for nobody.

[–] Banana@sh.itjust.works 3 points 2 weeks ago

Well duh, but fascism is only good for the extremely wealthy and i don't remember a time in history where fascists just listened to the working class.

[–] tiefling@lemmy.blahaj.zone 5 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)
[–] hddsx@lemmy.ca 8 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

With deregulation, the FBI probably can’t finish the background check within the required time frame which means the buyer is automatically approved at end of said timeframe IIRC.

I’m not saying we should deregulate firearms at all, but if we’re doing it we might as well use the second amendment as originally intended

[–] prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 7 points 2 weeks ago (3 children)

I’m not saying we should deregulate firearms at all, but if we’re doing it we might as well use the second amendment as originally intended

So for well-regulated militias?

[–] Corkyskog@sh.itjust.works 3 points 2 weeks ago

Wanna join my militia homie? We got lotsa rules...

[–] hddsx@lemmy.ca 1 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Yep, for each state to defend itself

[–] prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 0 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

And at the command of the governor of the state?

Yeah, nothing that could go wrong there.

[–] hddsx@lemmy.ca 2 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

It gives states the power to defend against incursion by other states.

[–] prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

So balkanization and warring states. On top of the neo-feudalism.

50 wealthy white dudes, each with their own fiefdom. Sounds amazing.

What's the point of having a federal government at that point?

[–] hddsx@lemmy.ca 4 points 2 weeks ago

Okay, what’s your suggestion? Capitulating to Trump for the sake of having a federal government?

[–] corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca 1 points 2 weeks ago

Yep, training and discipline.

[–] corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca 1 points 2 weeks ago

He’s rolling back gun regulation?

How come the headline used the noun "rollback" and not the verb "roll back"? It would seem Trump "rollbacked" the legislation, then.

(When journos can't spell, I do not trust them)