...While blaming the left wing for right-wing violence.
this post was submitted on 25 Sep 2025
980 points (99.6% liked)
Political Memes
9593 readers
2670 users here now
Welcome to politcal memes!
These are our rules:
Be civil
Jokes are okay, but don’t intentionally harass or disturb any member of our community. Sexism, racism and bigotry are not allowed. Good faith argumentation only. No posts discouraging people to vote or shaming people for voting.
No misinformation
Don’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.
Posts should be memes
Random pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.
No bots, spam or self-promotion
Follow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.
No AI generated content.
Content posted must not be created by AI with the intent to mimic the style of existing images
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
...while wearing lapel and tie pins in the shape of AR15s.
Sorry betterdeadthanreddit. Gonna have to cancel you for this radical left wing comment. We’ll be seeing you in ANTIFA jail!
Sound like less of a punishment and more of a networking opportunity.
Ah-reever-dayer-chee.
That's the spirit!
I just want you to know. I saw the amount of up votes and decided not to add one.
Nice
When they move away from that bulletproof glass they get into armored cars escorted by a small army of security guards.
I've seen members of parliament walking down the street like a normal person on multiple occasions.
Unless you're a front bench minister, there's probably very little risk to your safety (for now, anyway).
Though, I suppose this is a natural outcome when you're the hegemonic power of the world, much more incentive to kill politicans there (the USA)
It's quite foreign to me though, luckily.
I'm from Australia, by the way.
No school kids there I see, they're still the targets
...for companies selling very expensive stuff
instead of, you know, doing the obvious thing: restrict gun rights
but no, we must think of the kids! ...our future customers
Just shield Yourselves with children, You don't care about them anyway.
Shielding ourselves with kids sounds like a Musky idea.
That's giving too much credit. He probably saw the IDF doing it and thought it looked cool.
I dunno the IDF doesn’t seem too upset about killing children.
Safety for the rich ONLY
Hmm... this makes me wonder what gun rights people think about bulletproof materials, in general. Surely, they have to be in favor of them, because otherwise, they can't defend themselves from people who wield the guns that they support.
But in that case, wouldn't that imply that they'd be fine if everybody was always outfitted head-to-toe in bulletproof armor?
But if they allowed everybody to be completely bulletproof (I'm imagining a better bulletproof armor than exists in reality here), then there would be no purpose to being in favor of guns, since guns couldn't be used to hurt anybody.
I'm talking about the second amendment types who think their right to bear arms is because they can be used against people. Obviously, people who just like hunting or target shooting or collecting guns could have different views.
But the point is, a 2A guns rights person must really, like OP said, only support limited use of bulletproof materials. It's sort of an inherent hypocrisy to these people. Well, either that, or they're against bulletproof materials and are just okay with dying for their beliefs.
Disarming ourselves, while the fascists are fascing.
It's a bold move, Cotton.
I am one of those people who tries to base their opinions on evidence. When I look at the world today, the places with strict gun control also seem to be doing better at warding off fascism. I don't see any evidence that the immense number of guns in America have slowed the spread of fascism, at all, or see any hints that they'll be a major factor in defeating fascism in the future.
STOP! You are not allowed to use sound logic in the gun debate.
The US opened up the pandora's box back in 1789, too late now. Gun debate is over, 2nd Amendment already passed. Unless you can somehow get 3/4 of states to reverse it.
(Yes I know, technically the bill of rights passed after 1789, but the debate already happened, constitution only passed because the bill of rights were promised)
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
Does that sound like what we do today? Nope.
Why does the government infringe on my ability to own a machine gun or even a molotov cocktail?
It seems like the gun debate isn't over. We've constantly reinterpreted the 2nd Amendment over and over, and it will be reinterpreted further in the future.
Today, we heavily regulate machine guns but not rifles. Tomorrow, maybe we can choose to heavily regulate hand guns but not knives.
Maybe not today. Fix the democracy first.
i'd say it's more to do with the populations that put in those laws than the laws themselves.
Gun Rights person here. Bullet Proof materials are great. Body armor is a valid personal choice. Police/soldiers have access to armor piercing ammo so your third sentence doesn't track. (Bans on civilian ownership of armor-piercing ammo is unethical)
Honest question, is part of your motivation for upholding 2A rights the ability to overthrow the government? Because I find that one hard to fathom; could the US Gov really be overthrown? Is it based on the premise that lots of people in the military / drone operators would be part of the militia?
Not the user you replied to, but I'm pro 2A because I don't trust cops. I rather have my neighbors form a militia to protect ourselves. I don't exactly know my neighbors very well, but it'd be more preferrable than the cops.
A citizen's militia should just fill the role of law enforcement really.
Its not really just about fascism, I don't trust cops even if trump wasn't elected.
I had a terrible experience with cops and I do not want that to happen again, ever. No one should have to experience what I had endured.
ACAB.
"Under no pretext should arms and ammunition be surrendered; any attempt to disarm the workers must be frustrated, by force if necessary" -Karl Marx
I’m sorry you had a bad experience and appreciate your reply. It makes sense to me. Hope you never have to resort to it.
In our case does it need to be overthrowing or making the price of Fucking Around too high? The police in the US are alot more respectful to large groups of armed people gathering than they are to people they feel they can night-stick without consequences. Trump & Co wants martial law so bad he can taste it but if he doesn't do it according to the sensitives of his heavily-armed base, things will turn into a shitshow. Plus, It's a universal principle to me and there are many peoples & governments that aren't the US. Would universal gun ownership have changed things for the Uyghurs, for the massacred in Myanmar, or Sudan, for the residents of Bucha, Ukraine? I think it would. Which leads to another point often lost in the argument: the main purpose of the US 2nd Amendment is for defense against foreign dangers. To allow a large force of irregulars to exist that could slow down an attack until the state or national governments could respond.
They aren’t called gun nuts for nothing.
Safety for the rich ONLY
That's why they hate Luigi
Same with gun control legislation, it never applies to the rich or former cops.
Well phrased. A first-grader will understand that there's something wrong here.
A little more simplification and it might just be accessible to the average red state voter.
Yep, nothing to see here folks
Looks expensive.
Ill probably make this its own post but id love to hear a solution to this problem.
Cops busting down everyone's doors and ransacking their home for weapons doesn't seem like something we want. Plus, they will remove minorities defenses first, as usual, if laws get passed.
There really is no solution.
Unfortunately the founding fathers didn't envision the nation having a voting majority of morons who vote in other morons into power, but alas here we are.
But I do think their intentions were for wealthy white landowners to mostly be in control and have checks in place to stop morons from ever having a majority but that crumbled away over a few generations.
Actually, they did. The framers of the constitution didn't trust voters. There's a lot of indications, they thought voters were idiots. I find it hard to argue they were wrong.
Non-voters are just as idiotic as it turns out.
The fool, or the fool who follows?
You're so close to getting it.
Take this, and apply it to literally everything.
Money, food, houses, stability, security, soon even food, clean water, etc. All for them. To own it all. To control it all. To extract profit from all of us.
You’re so close to getting it.
... implying I don't already get it?
Well then good. My mistake.
No worries!
At least they learnt from their mistakes.