Leftists protest open-carry rally

Pretty much my man. Gun laws were extremely strict for the vast majority of the Soviet populace except the nomenklatura and other elites.
I can't think of a socialist state that didn't have very strict gun laws. Meanwhile Hitler made gun laws more open to rhe vast majority of Germans. He did disarm the jews but they were less than 1% of the population at the time. By far and large, most citizens saw greater gun rights. You didn't even have to be a NSDAP member to own them.

the thing is, a socialist society will only have strict gun laws when needed. when the majority of the populace supports the party, it is not necessary.

American Socialists are retarded students 95% of the time.

I take it you also think that North Korea is democratic, yes? It would be horribly hypocritical of you if you didn't

In other words most soviet citizens did not support the government? Or Chinese citizens? How about Cubans and North Koreans?
If most people do not support the ruling party, that says a lot about your political ideology my man.

except for when they did.

Yeah, some ☭TANKIE☭s would argue the DPRK is democratic here, are you new?

Then why were gun laws not loosened. When did those regimes ever have lax gun laws during their rule? They pretty much engaged in mass confiscation as soon as they got power.

Attached: 1523898839210.png (645x729, 61.95K)

You do realize that in order for a revolution to happen, there has to be popular support, right? Unlike a fascist coup d'état, socialist revolutions do not rely on funding from bankers and military aid from the USA.
You might be arguing that the USSR lost support from it's citizens after the revolution succeeded, but then why were most countries against the dismantling of the USSR?

The october coup was funded by jews in western country.

Based Jews

t. revisionists

Attached: ClipboardImage.png (640x480, 365.9K)

Attached: mutt.jpg (360x360, 18.84K)

Nigger what the fuck are you claiming?
First off, the Bolsheiviks absolutely recieved monetary support from bankers in NYC and elsewhere.
Nobody has answered my point. Why is it that every socialist regime engaged in mass confiscation of arms from many of the same peasants who fought for the revolution right after the seize power?

If the reason for this was because the new regime did not have most of the political support from the populace, that says a lot about your ideology. However the Chink commie stated that the populace did in fact support them by far and large. So why the fuck did gun laws remain extremely strict throughout the entirety of their rule?

It makes no sense. The reason why is that you cannot abolish private businesses and property without having a monopoly on force. The peasants will get uppity at times and want to keep their grain or start a business to increase personal living standards. This goes against socialist doctrine, and if those same very peasants are armed, it becomes harder to shut down these business and seize their private property.

The Nazis let the vast majority keep their guns and made gun laws more liberals to most of the populace.

Permits were valid for three years, rather than one year.[9]

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_legislation_in_Germany#Gun_regulation_of_the_Third_Reich

The restrictions were obviously even more liberal for NSDAP members, however you did not have to be a member to own a gun. Rifles and shotgun acquistion was completely deregulated for the populace, members or not requiring no license.

Imagine if Lenin, Stalin, Mao, Castro, Kim Jong il, or Tito passed such laws. They knew they had to maintain a monopoly on force to keep their power.

I'm not even American, dumbshit.

Attached: 1478650019089.jpg (1341x3636, 472.9K)

Fucking bullshit: in Yugoslavia you were actively ENCOURAGED to get fucking guns. They trained you in school and once you had a licence you could get anything, and to get a licence all you need was training. They had their literal education system gear people towards owning firearms.

Citation? What were the requirements to obtain a license? Limitations on guns and ammo, registration required or no, etc?

Also if you look at the EU gun ban directive that was recently passed in parliament, nearly all the nay votes came from the right wing nationalist parties, while the soc dems, greens, libshits, and communist parties voted yay.

Albania had a Swiss style militia system where everybody had a rifle at home.

Im Pro-Open carry but come the fuck on
Anyone who goes to a "Pro-Open Carry Rally" is 99% either a Reactionary at least or some E-Celeb trying to get some clips of dem Libtards stopping the free speech

IIRC they had them stored in armories only to be taken out in case of an invasion.

Requirements for a license was training (which literally every child got in school, which is quite common in Eastern Europe). Limitations on ammo and guns were not emplaced until post break-up in Serbia. And yes you had to be registered, because you could be called up to join militias.

Alright, but is there a citation for this specifically?

Iirc you're a retard not worth arguing with.
Bye bye baboon.

Attached: 58452429556209f6445246dc077b892193329df686b31d169eb4287316c697b0.jpg (1476x1015 57.33 KB, 875.64K)

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bunkers_in_Albania#Military_doctrine
Lmao.
And furthermore this has nothing to do with private gun ownership laws that are unrelated to militia duty.

Sage

You're a moron.

Those are liberals not leftists.

Attached: PorkyGunControl.png (1200x1181, 950.16K)

you literal retard. Also allowing workers to keep weapons post-revolution is a good way to defend against revisionism.

OP; A rudimentary search suggests that people in the USSR were allowed hunting weapons.

There literally is no left wing in the US. American radical politics are LARP, and all exceptions to the rule (i.e. early Jacobin) inevitably get sucked back into the liberal mainstream by pretentious idiots that can't mentally comprehend the idea that politics outside of identity exist.

Owning a gun in Nazi Germany was part of ethnic policy, not a civil right. It was meant to enable pogroms.
Right-wing politics are about idealism over materialism, they have nothing to do with personal virtues.

Did you even read your own source? Doesn't sound like a pro-gun society to me:

That isn't the point, though

How doesn't it seem to be? Weapon have ID number, this is true in the US also.

Also, jews are not germans, they deserve no right.

But it is, who is you to say what is leftism or not?

Kek, the left is collectivist by far and large in most of its political goals. The right has been far more individualist. Why do socialist regimes gun grab and implement very strict laws the most by far?

After very strict procedures my man.

Jews were literally 1% of the nation. Hitler made it far easier for the vast majority to own guns.

>>>/liberty/

how do you explain neoliberalism then, brainlet?

...

neoliberalism is anti-indisidualist. It’s inherently oppressive and authoritarian. The NSA is a secret police a million times stronger than any before.