What is the Zig Forums consensus on gun control? I know that many are against...

Logan Bailey
Logan Bailey

What is the Zig Forums consensus on gun control? I know that many are against it, and this pro-ownership stance is common among a variety of groups from MLs to anarchists. However, I've also talked to supposedly radical leftists whose beliefs on the subject are the same as that of the liberal establishment. What do you have to say on the subject?

pic unrelated

Attached: 40d.png (118.44 KB, 600x617)

Other urls found in this thread:

marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1917/apr/20b.htm
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_laws_in_the_Soviet_Union
youtube.com/watch?v=XdhIYWb3XVU
alignable.com/aledo-tx/coulson-and-associates
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bunkers_in_Albania
archive.org/details/AlbaniaDefiant/page/n1
m.youtube.com/watch?v=6v_z48do7NQ
votewatch.eu/en/term8-directive-of-the-european-parliament-and-of-the-council-amending-council-directive-91-477-eec-on-con.html#/##vote_list_tabs_content_2
canada.isidewith.com/political-parties/ca-communist/domestic-policy
wsws.org/en/articles/2018/03/16/pers-m16.html
internationalist.org/opportunistsaiddemocratsguncontrol1804.html
justfacts.com/guncontrol.asp
qz.com/641493/how-hunting-became-a-form-of-dissent-in-albania/
m.youtube.com/watch?v=6v_z48do7NQ.
loc.gov/law/help/firearms-control/china.php
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overview_of_gun_laws_by_nation
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Estimated_number_of_civilian_guns_per_capita_by_country
rupe-india.org/59/han.html
euronews.com/2018/05/05/trump-s-knife-crime-claim-how-do-the-us-and-uk-compare-
youtube.com/watch?v=GT71lOZBB3w
cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr67/nvsr67_05.pdf
scotsman.com/news/question-on-masonic-links-left-dunblane-inquiry-chief-stunned-1-1099013
jakkkobinmag.com/2018/02/gun-control-parkland-students-race-police
snopes.com/fact-check/little-gun-history/

David Fisher
David Fisher

So long as the enemy has and uses guns, we have no chance of achieving anything without them too.
I have however always been happy living in a country without guns, and I'd probably be freaked out walking around in America with crazy burgers packing pistols when going to McDonalds.

Jackson Young
Jackson Young

Pretty sure everybody here apart from a few socdems opposes gun control. I personally would support a well armed population even after socialism is established, using something like Switzerland's militia system as well as permissive private ownership laws like in the US, Canada, or the Czech Republic. I would want some light controls, like needing to purchase a license which would require passing a safety course. This would grant unrestricted access to rifles and shotguns, including semi autos without registration or tracking of purchases. Handguns may require a special license with additional training and possibly registration since they are far more likely to be used in a crime, but that would be it. Unfortunately apart from Albania I don't know of any socialist states that actually did this.

Attached: 450.PNG (144.92 KB, 550x400)

Bentley Allen
Bentley Allen

Depends strongly on whether the police are also armed.

Aiden Hernandez
Aiden Hernandez

Mandatory gun ownership for every household.

Noah Moore
Noah Moore

This
All our people are armed in the full meaning of the word. Every Albanian, city-dweller or villager, has his weapon at home.
t. Hoxha

Wyatt Robinson
Wyatt Robinson

Under a capitalist state, you should be able to overthrow the state, at some point armed struggle is inevitable.
Under transitionary socialism, weapons should be mandatory for the general population along with training and strict rules of usage as to avoir counter-revolutionary elements.
Under communism, guns would be useless.

Adam Clark
Adam Clark

the Zig Forums consensus
no such thing

Jeremiah Evans
Jeremiah Evans

i'm overall pro gun.

But i live in brazil and i can't defend gun ownership here. People are batshit crazy and already kill themselves for dumb reasons enough. We are a really violent country with shit revolutionary potential. Legalizing guns would not arm the good proles, only the reactionary middle class(i know they are still proles, there is no such thing as middle class, yaddayadda) would have access to guns.

Besides any revolutionary group can get some smugled guns it's hella easy.

John Nguyen
John Nguyen

Extremely light regulation, hell maybe even this unironically

Ian Howard
Ian Howard

We should push "gun control" only if its applied on all levels of the state and economy. Fight the American weapons industry, military, and police force instead of persecuting citizens owning arms to protect themselves.

In America "gun control" could easily escalate into a "war on guns," in which black proletarian "bad guys with guns" are shot and imprisoned, while the reactionary white middle class "good guys with guns" are glorified.

This isn't a question of "gun control" vs. "no gun control," you have to think about specific policy choices, how these affect the working class, and how they relate to future revolutionary prospects.

Legalizing guns would not arm the good proles, only the reactionary middle class(i know they are still proles, there is no such thing as middle class, yaddayadda) would have access to guns.
Besides any revolutionary group can get some smugled guns it's hella easy.
Good points.

Mason Hughes
Mason Hughes

In the US, the police (and military obviously) are extremely heavily armed, as is the most reactionary element of the civilian populace. These people will not willingly disarm themselves, and if they were required to by law they would simply hide and stockpile their weapons. As such, "gun control" in the US would necessarily involve the disarmament of the revolutionary and potentially revolutionary people while leaving the forces of reactionary as well-armed as ever. For that reason, I can't support gun control in the US.

However, I think the American cultural attachment to guns is extremely unhealthy. In a global communist society, I would support the elimination of firearms.

Justin Perry
Justin Perry

This and make firearms safety and training a part of the school curriculum.

Nathaniel Richardson
Nathaniel Richardson

i feel like what's always missing in these discussions is a sense of the current reality around guns. citizens are not using guns to defend themselves from authorities. and when they do it's usually a paranoid, right-wing, up in the mountains type situation. when i think of a gun being used in america i think of:
police shooting black guy
criminal shooting innocent
criminal shooting criminal
crazy person throwing a violent hissy fit
husband shoots wife
wife shoots husband
white kid blowing himself up

a huge portion of gun activity has to simply be around drug prohibition. so while we're preparing an arsenal to defend ourselves from authority we're just being fucked over as in any other area of life. i'd imagine gun manufacturers love that they exist within an industry that has existential meaning within the united states

Angel Baker
Angel Baker

yeah, and start teaching gun safety at least 2 years before letting them handle the guns

Jace Cruz
Jace Cruz

UNDER
NO
PRETEXT

Brayden Green
Brayden Green

i feel like what's always missing in these discussions is a sense of the current reality around guns. citizens are not using guns to defend themselves from authorities. and when they do it's usually a paranoid, right-wing, up in the mountains type situation. when i think of a gun being used in america i think of

Using guns to defend yourself against authorities is useless because it is a lone person against the system which you are likely to lose regardless. They are needed for an organized revolution against capitalism or self defense

You listed a bunch of anecdotes

a huge portion of gun activity has to simply be around drug prohibition. so while we're preparing an arsenal to defend ourselves from authority we're just being fucked over as in any other area of life. i'd imagine gun manufacturers love that they exist within an industry that has existential meaning within the united states

Who is being "fucked over" by who in your mind?

Jacob Robinson
Jacob Robinson

i used to be against gun ownership when i was a liberal. but now as a full on insurectionary commie anarchist, im loaded to the teeth

Attached: 1525252684681.png (143.87 KB, 1184x992)

Christopher Turner
Christopher Turner

2843025
what? i want to shoot fascist, alongside black militias similar to the black panthers.

Carson Gomez
Carson Gomez

2843025
which is really just a fantasy i have and not an actual thing i will be doing just incase fbi here.

Nathan Cox
Nathan Cox

I’m against gun control because A) While a standing army is nessicary for self-defence, when it is supported by a militia system it can operate much better in home territory, you don’t want your socialist republic being annex by fascists. B) hunting is fun. C) A militia system should replace the police force which should be abolished.
As such, "gun control" in the US would necessarily involve the disarmament of the revolutionary and potentially revolutionary people while leaving the forces of reactionary as well-armed as ever. For that reason, I can't support gun control in the US.
The solution to this is to get leftists to man up and stockpile guns
However, I think the American cultural attachment to guns is extremely unhealthy.
Nah bruh, shooting cans and drinking whisky is mad fun.
Using guns to defend yourself against authorities is useless because it is a lone person against the system which you are likely to lose regardless. They are needed for an organized revolution against capitalism or self defense
When a revolution happens it oftentimes leads to civil war, so if leftists are armed and trained this would make winning said civil war easier.

Austin Harris
Austin Harris

Does anyone think that armed struggle would happen with "legal" weaponry?

Revolutionaries should discuss self-defense regardless of bourgeois law.

Adam Roberts
Adam Roberts

Ever heard of LCP, fellow br?

Grayson Lee
Grayson Lee

This.
But more realistically, I'd want some kind of license and basic safety/training course to be a requirement. That said, I'd also remove most of the other regulation and do stuff like legalize automatics, no gun registration, no mag capacity limits, no minimums on barrel length or suppressors, open/concealed carry legalized, etc.

Carson Long
Carson Long

It sucks cause I think all the liberal pro-gun control memes about how gun owners are mostly just deranged racists looking for excuses to shoot black people, but pragmatically I would want gun rights only for revolutionary purposes.

Ideally I'd want them to be banned after the revolution, but who knows, maybe we won't have the huge problem with nihilism we have today, so it wouldn't be a big problem.

Mason Ross
Mason Ross

yes i did, what about them?

Carson Hall
Carson Hall

4 words: treat them like cars

Asher Bell
Asher Bell

Replace them with electric powered publicly owned guns?

Carson Walker
Carson Walker

2843020
2843025
samefag

Juan Torres
Juan Torres

If we honestly believe that the police are closely tied with many of the fascists and other dangerous elements of the right wing then we have every reason to believe that the police are going to target the left and the poor for firearm seizure and control and leave fascists and violent right wingers and bourgs continue to accumulate weapons.

There is no reason to give them further legal recourse to do so.

Attached: chairman-Moe.png (60.56 KB, 740x640)

Jordan Ramirez
Jordan Ramirez

They police are against the general population not just leftists

Henry Turner
Henry Turner

Public Tesla cannons freely available from conveniently located charging racks throughout the city
Stop, I can only get so hard

William Ortiz
William Ortiz

I'm aware of that, but a lot of them have very close ties to many fascist groups that they'll just overlook or put last.

Even if they'll do it, a lot of cops are going to drag their feet and "forget" their friend has a stash of AR's.

Noah Miller
Noah Miller

And the police over look antifa harassing people in portland.

They don't have a preference they just do as they please

Ryder Lewis
Ryder Lewis

There’s basically three logically consistent positions one can take.

1) The democratic institutions of my country are strong enough that positive change can be made purely through them and there is no need at all for violence or the threat thereof. (If this is your position, you’re probably a liberal and don’t belong on this board.)

2) The state is ultimately a dictatorship of the bourgeoisie and state power can be effectively challenged purely by militias. In this case there’s literally no reason to not openly support full access to weapons. In fact, you should advocate that every leftist arm themselves.

3) The state is ultimately a dictatorship of the bourgeoisie and cannot be effectively opposed by militia groups, overthrowing it requires a split in the military and police. In which case, you should be advocating active infiltration into the military and police and active agitation among their ranks. Militias certainly wouldn’t hurt, so you should probably still support gun rights, but I can understand taking an anti-gun stance to appease liberals.

What I can’t stand are the people who try to take none of the above by either implying that everything can be solved by escalating the protest movement (with vague references to “masses in the streets”) or by saying that revolution is only possible in foreign countries, thus implying that people from other countries should do your revolution for you while your useless ass does little more than provide moral support. At least in Burgerland, the left has generally coalesced around what you might call “protest culture” and both of these positions have the effect of putting the endless fucking impotent protests front and center, either as the ultimate act of political organizing that will eventually bring about the socialist revolution in some completely vague way or as the only thing one can do. The other element is the infiltration of liberalism into left politics.

Attached: BC385E90-69F6-46BD-9941-BF6AEDE488E6.jpeg (25.63 KB, 225x224)

Jaxon Gray
Jaxon Gray

A large number of members of dangerous far right organizations have been active police members who engaged with the group, intentionally and actively to persecute often racist or otherwise bigoted agendas. There is no similarity with left-wing organizations, police in those organizations are almost always informants.

Grayson Ramirez
Grayson Ramirez

Political struggle can happen through different means than full-on armed struggle or guerrilla-style warfare (even though there is almost no historically revolutionary event which didn't include them). Striking and occupying of the economy is an example and might prove revolutionary if applyied strategically as to weaken the reaches of the capitalist state power. When you refer to a possibility of spilt within the military, this often results in a civil war, so you better be armed when this happens.
There is no point in advocating for counter-productive praxis just as to "appease" your political enemies, unless this is purely strategical and has no real effect on the masses (propaganda and such).

Jacob Reed
Jacob Reed

Well if you mean leftists as anarchists abd communist only and far right and any rightwing person you're creating a false dichotomy. The FBi is overwhelming liberal and most media outlets college campuses are hostile to the far right

Easton Gonzalez
Easton Gonzalez

I’m not saying that protest is bad, but that it has limitations and has been basically impotent for the left groups that treat it as some kind of magic bullet rather than simply one of a variety of political tools in their tool belt.

And my point was not that you would appease liberal parties, but that you might attempt to broaden your appeal to the broader masses who may have liberal sentiments by providing lip service to some basic popular gun control policy.

Colton Jenkins
Colton Jenkins

We have this thread every week and the answer is always the same

Adrian Long
Adrian Long

Attached: orwell.jpg (56.1 KB, 850x400)

Isaiah Bell
Isaiah Bell

i think a nuclear device should be given to every single citizen regardless of sex, race, gender or mental stability

C:

Anthony Allen
Anthony Allen

WMDs are equal to guns
Nice argument from analogy there

Dylan Brooks
Dylan Brooks

license to exercise a right
he literally think the gun grabbers would be happy with swiss laws
lmao this fucking board outs themselves as gun grabbers yet again. Stay off /k/ please.

Pro-tip: the left in switzerland constantly pushes for tighter laws. The SP and Greens all support stricter laws, whilst it is the right-wing nationalist party (the SVP) that opposes it.

Julian Thompson
Julian Thompson

licensing, registration, tests literally only apply towards operating cars on public roads. none of that shit is required to drive on private land or even buy and own a car that will not be taken out on public roads.

Jeremiah Rogers
Jeremiah Rogers

Also don't forget corrupt cops and driver instructors that fail you a couple of times since you have to pay for each try out.

Chase Reed
Chase Reed

Pro-tip: the left in switzerland constantly pushes for tighter laws.
dude pussy bitch spineless western “leftists” are cucks who want to disarm the workers
this has any bearing on my position whatsoever
Kys. Also I post on /k/ regularly and have no plans to stop so eat my ass.

Attached: 959E566B-0F4B-4546-9C2D-08E2802B1870.jpeg (126.1 KB, 603x460)

Aaron Hill
Aaron Hill

"t-they aren't real leftists!"

Marx was referring to an arming of the workers to overthrow capitalism. That text is not about an individual right to bear arms, nor does it say what would happen to the guns after the revolution. If you think that it is equivalent to an individual RTKBA that is supported by the right, you are clinically retarded.

Lenin said the same thing; all the workers should be armed and form a militia: marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1917/apr/20b.htm

So what did Lenin do after the revolution? He confiscated all the arms owned by peasants and imposed draconian gun laws.

The December decree of the CPC of 1918, "On the surrender of weapons", ordered people to surrender any firearms, swords, bayonets and bombs, regardless of the degree of serviceability. The penalty for not doing so was ten years' imprisonment.[2]

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_laws_in_the_Soviet_Union

Nobody likes you or wants you. Trusting a leftist to uphold gun rights is laughable.

Nathaniel Reyes
Nathaniel Reyes

Imagine being this much of a retarded single-issue voter. I bet you're one of those idiots who thinks than muh Burger freedumbs were upheld only by dipshits with rifles in their bedrooms, when Burgerland's gun laws have never, ever been effectively used to resist the US state and have more often been used to further the interests of the American political establishment. When a particular group was considered a threat to the Burger agenda, the US was just as gung ho about restricting weapons as any other nation.
youtube.com/watch?v=XdhIYWb3XVU

Camden Collins
Camden Collins

That was when the soviets got invaded by every imperialist power out there, every government confiscates weapons in such a situation. Through the military, militias, shooting clubs and hunting a lot of soviet men and women knew how to handle guns. They had higher gun ownership than most western countries but with none of the school shootings.

Think before you post.

Adam Young
Adam Young

Posts wikipedia as a source
Ignores the fact that the Soviets were critically under-armed and needed to quickly consolidate arms
Also ignoring that they were in a fucking civil war

Attached: 1517799541348.jpg (103.5 KB, 397x814)

Bentley Roberts
Bentley Roberts

All able- bodied, sane, adults should be armed. Communist groups should provide safety training, and promote working class gun culture. We should push for the state to subsidize gun ownership.

Attached: smonkkk.jpg (86.53 KB, 833x960)

Julian Smith
Julian Smith

outs himself as a dumbfuck gun grabber
Like clockwork. I own guns so gun grabbers like yourself can be shot.
Bullshit. You have no source for private gun ownership in the USSR being higher than most western countries.
the strict laws were only because of the war!
Bullshit. The ONLY gun you could own in the ussr after the wars was a double-barrel hunting shotgun and you had to register as a hunter, read the rest of the article retards. Meanwhile Hitler loosened gun laws massively for the vast majority of German citizens.

When leftists talk about gun rights, it's about a collective right such as serving the state or a worker's militia. I don't give a fuck about about gun ownership in a collective sense, but an INDIVIDUAL sense. The right to bear arms is an individual right and firmly a right-wing position as are most negative liberties.

Attached: 1543713447770.jpg (94.6 KB, 1024x700)

Bentley Cooper
Bentley Cooper

what part of "nehm de Gewehre zum Hand" did you not understand?

Carter Gray
Carter Gray

lol why you want a gun for yourself retard only gun needed is for defending socialist motherland what are you gonna do shoot yourself

Luis Sanders
Luis Sanders

Meanwhile Hitler loosened gun laws massively for the vast majority of German citizens.
Are you forgetting about how he banned guns for jews? Pinochet confiscated guns from all the Chilean citizens. Reagan said there's no reason for american citizens to be carrying weapons.
When leftists talk about gun rights, it's about a collective right such as serving the state or a worker's militia
That's a bit of a generalization, don't ya think? Revolutionary Catalonia and the Ukranian Free Territory didn't ban guns and they were leftist.

Angel Jackson
Angel Jackson

Gun control occurs in the hands of an experienced operator

@dannyocoulson
alignable.com/aledo-tx/coulson-and-associates

Liam Ortiz
Liam Ortiz

why do you keep posting this everywhere e.e

Ryan Moore
Ryan Moore

Deer don’t hunt themselves.

Charles Parker
Charles Parker

I think “universal gun rights” is more effectively carried out through a program of universal conscription. The shit you’re praising has never been used for anything other than upholding the murderous settler-colonialist regime of the US through a clandestine terror state of right-wing militias.

Bentley Nelson
Bentley Nelson

Jews were literally less than 1% of Germany's population at the time. The laws were loosened so much that long guns didn't even require a license, and you didn't have to be part of the NSDAP to own guns.

revolutionary ukraine and catalonia didn't ban guns

Because they were fighting a civil war for the entirety of their existence. Of course they had to arm the workers to fight a fucking war. Again, this has nothing to do with an individual right to bear arms. Again, what you are describing is a collective arming of a militia so they can fight a conflict. This is not comparable to an individual right to bear arms espoused by the right at all.

I don't care. Conscription has nothing to do with individual gun ownership. I don't give a fuck about guns if it has to do with being required to serve a collective duty because it has nothing to do with it being an individual right.

Joseph Perez
Joseph Perez

Because they were fighting a civil war for the entirety of their existence. Of course they had to arm the workers to fight a fucking war. Again, this has nothing to do with an individual right to bear arms. Again, what you are describing is a collective arming of a militia so they can fight a conflict. This is not comparable to an individual right to bear arms espoused by the right at all.
Firstly, neither anarchists nor communists would be going on about natural "rights" period because such things are based on the idealized notion that the "right" already pre-exists the law and is something which already "naturally" exists in a state of nature, with the law simply reafirming what is already "endowed" by nature. In reality, your ability to do something is limited entirely by what law the governance creates. There is no natural law or natural rights.
Secondly, they are fucking anarchists. I'm not even an anarchist and even I understand that this wouldn't even be thing they would do because it would necessitate a government and a strict legal system to draft.
I don't care. Conscription has nothing to do with individual gun ownership. I don't give a fuck about guns if it has to do with being required to serve a collective duty because it has nothing to do with it being an individual right.
This may shock you, but you're never going to find a communist country that doesn't engage in universal conscription or have laws which require military service. In that regard, the collective duty is equivalent to your individual "right". Whatever you gain in your required collective duty is what you gain as an individual. They are not separate in the condition and society we are talking about. If you want a good example of this, Communist Albania (an example of very hardline ML state) had extremely lax gun laws (as in weapons moved very freely between people and we're unregulated as shit) and had compulsory military service. Neither of these were viewed as separate to each other because they are inherently interconnected. There is not a situation where you would not be in the military or be eligible for conscription period, so no law guranteeing a "right" exists because practically it would have zero meaning because the conditions it would be used in a court or whatever would never happen. You would never not be in the military or prepared for conscription. Ever.

Adam Gonzalez
Adam Gonzalez

Name one thing that “individual gun rights” accomplishes that universal conscription doesn’t do better other than the maintenance of a clandestine right-wing terror state.

William Jones
William Jones

Firstly, neither anarchists nor communists would be going on about natural "rights" period because such things are based on the idealized notion that the "right" already pre-exists the law and is something which already "naturally" exists in a state of nature, with the law simply reafirming what is already "endowed" by nature. In reality, your ability to do something is limited entirely by what law the governance creates. There is no natural law or natural rights.

Secondly, they are fucking anarchists. I'm not even an anarchist and even I understand that this wouldn't even be thing they would do because it would necessitate a government and a strict legal system to draft.

I didn't say shit about natural rights. I said individual right. As a right to gun ownership for the individual independent of any militia service or duty.

If a state has conscription, but at the same time affords an individual right to bear arms for its citizenry that's fine with me. The issue is that virtually all Marxist states had the former but extremely restrictive gun laws for the individual. The USSR might have conscripted the populace and trained them in the usage of arms, and hell even had armories stocked with weaponry in case of an invasion, war or whatever, but the laws concerning private possession of firearms was extremely restrictive.

This may shock you, but you're never going to find a communist country that doesn't engage in universal conscription or have laws which require military service. In that regard, the collective duty is equivalent to your individual "right". Whatever you gain in your required collective duty is what you gain as an individual. They are not separate in the condition and society we are talking about. If you want a good example of this, Communist Albania (an example of very hardline ML state) had extremely lax gun laws (as in weapons moved very freely between people and we're unregulated as shit) and had compulsory military service.

See above. Can you link me to a single source detailing Albania's gun laws for the private citizenry? If so I will concede my argument and freely admit that there is an example of a Marxist state with lax as fuck laws for the individual. If, however it required licensing, justification for ownership, etc, etc, my point still stands.

Because an individual right to gun ownership has nothing to do with serving the state or community. It's so the state cannot infringe on my rights and I can own guns freely be it for personal reasons of sporting, hunting, collecting, personal defense, or because I simply want to. Not everything has to serve the fucking collective.

Carson Rodriguez
Carson Rodriguez

Individual gun rights have never, not once, stopped the state from infringing on anyone’s rights. If anything, the American system of free individual gun ownership has been an aspect of state repression by, once again, creating a clandestine terror state run by right-wing militias.

Contrast this with universal conscription, which effectively turns the military into a public institution, grants all citizens martial training and a weapon, and you have an actually effective way of arming the citizenry.

Kayden Watson
Kayden Watson

When can I own towed field artillery

Camden Cox
Camden Cox

Literally a free AK-47 for everyone.

Nolan Williams
Nolan Williams

After the revolution
Mandatory gun ownership and marksmanship classes tbh

currently
Couldn't give less of a shit tbh. The majority of legal gun owners belong to the reactionary middle class. When SHTF most proles would mostly have to rely on guns procured from stormed police stations and smuggled over by revolutionary orgs. Believing the bourg will let you go to walmart and stock up for the revolution smacks of muh american dream idealism tbh

Charles Lee
Charles Lee

I didn't say shit about natural rights. I said individual right. As a right to gun ownership for the individual independent of any militia service or duty.
Did you miss the point of you never not being in military service or duty? Individual people are allowed to own multiple firearms as individuals not for a seperate milita duty they go to where only then you can use the gun, but for the the fact that they are collectively the milita. That is to say, any weapons you own will immediately relate to your militia duty upon purchase as a requirement of your service, just as with any other thing you buy which could be utilized for defense.
The issue is that virtually all Marxist states had the former but extremely restrictive gun laws for the individual. The USSR might have conscripted the populace and trained them in the usage of arms, and hell even had armories stocked with weaponry in case of an invasion, war or whatever, but the laws concerning private possession of firearms was extremely restrictive.
The USSR was in an entirely different position than say Albania. It's was larger and so had the immense security problem of it's enemies being able to train clandestine pockets of counter-revolutionaries more easily and had to constantly deal with the US trying to fund terror cells in it's states. As such, the restrictions that were put into place were done exclusively to combat this. It was done out of necessity because not doing so would be freely giving the west an advantage and open up within themselves an exploitable weakness they simply could not afford at the time. The US through Europe could move agents into USSR territory more easily then the USSR could move agents into the US. Such a reality requires difficult decisions and precautionary measures. Next time don't keep forming terror cells repeatedly.
See above. Can you link me to a single source detailing Albania's gun laws for the private citizenry? If so I will concede my argument and freely admit that there is an example of a Marxist state with lax as fuck laws for the individual. If, however it required licensing, justification for ownership, etc, etc, my point still stands.
I think you misunderstand. The only laws from Albania that we can discern regarding gun ownership requires every individual to own a gun/a cache of guns. That is to say, there is no law whatsoever we can find restricting gun ownership. There is zero documentation of the government attempting to restrict it or restrictions ever being in place. When I say "lax", I mean that in it's truest form. When I say guns moved freely, I don't mean they just moved between depots. Guns moved between household to household and person to person with no written documentation at all.
Because an individual right to gun ownership has nothing to do with serving the state or community. It's so the state cannot infringe on my rights and I can own guns freely be it for personal reasons of sporting, hunting, collecting, personal defense, or because I simply want to.
As an the user mentioned here , individual gun rights have never stopped infringement once. Your "rights" are things which are easily crossed over or ignored because the state is the one providing the "right" in the first place. They are not concrete, and if the gun ownership was truely unregulated then there wouldn't even be a law "granting" your ability to own one. Conscription and military service on the other hand provides concrete "rights" because they are not rights at all, they are a requirement demanded by the necessity of defense for you to own a gun and for any further guns you purchase to be applicable to be used in the militia. Whatever you want to do with those guns on your free time is your choice, but you cannot separate it from your military duty.

Jeremiah Perry
Jeremiah Perry

the situation isn't perfect
Dude my state passed a bill that has nullified all federal laws. The only states dogshit for gun rights are the ones where many self-described socialists and faggots who have their pronouns in their twitter bio congregate in.

you can use guns for militia duty!

Don't care. Unless I can literally fire up a website find someone selling a fun and pay him cash in a parking lot for a gun the laws are not lax. Deal with it.

see above

For shits and giggles I googled Albania's gun laws:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bunkers_in_Albania

Citizens were trained from the age of 12 to station themselves in the nearest bunker to repel invaders.[9] Local Party cells organised families to clean and maintain their local bunkers,[10] and civil defence drills were held at least twice a month, lasting for up to three days, in which civilians of military age of both sexes were issued with rifles (but no ammunition).[18]

"yeah you were given guns for militia duty but you couldn't own ammo :)"

LMAO. """"""""""""Lax""""""""""""" laws my fucking ass.

John Reyes
John Reyes

Citizens were trained from the age of 12 to station themselves in the nearest bunker to repel invaders.[9] Local Party cells organised families to clean and maintain their local bunkers,[10] and civil defence drills were held at least twice a month, lasting for up to three days, in which civilians of military age of both sexes were issued with rifles (but no ammunition).[18]
Source: An unlinked times article from 1984
To quote Albania Defiant:
The entire Albanian people are armed, but the navy, the air force, and armored units are—naturally enough—not particularly strong. In May 1961 the Soviet leaders tried to undermine Albania's defenses by giving their officers orders to steal Albania's eight submarines. Naturally, this theft irritated the Albanians. But it hardly undermined Albania's defenses, which are based on the ability of its totally armed population to defend its mountains.
Chinese support is important, but crucial to Albania's defense is that the entire Albanian people are armed, have weapons. There are weapons in every village. Ten minutes after the alarm sounds, the entire population of a village must be ready for combat. There has never been any shortage of weapons in Albania, but never have the people been as armed as they are today.
archive.org/details/AlbaniaDefiant/page/n1
And before you say "but they could never recreationally use those weapons!", they could and in fact nearly every village had shooting range. Every indivdual had their own personal firearms and pistol shooting was an extremely popular past-time for woman. Of course their wasn't very much of a variety, but that is all they had was waht their allies provided them, what they produced, and what they had leftover.
m.youtube.com/watch?v=6v_z48do7NQ

David Scott
David Scott

Dude my state passed a bill that has nullified all federal laws. The only states dogshit for gun rights are the ones where many self-described socialists and faggots who have their pronouns in their twitter bio congregate in.
Bullshit, if the state decided tomorrow that X person or group was a threat justifiable of confiscation, you bet your ass your "gun rights" would stop mattering in the slightest. "Gun rights" existed in the 1960s, but that didn't stop the government and law enforcement from raiding communist and black liberation groups and seizing all of their caches and firearms. You don't even have socialists currently in any state government anyway, so I have no idea what you're blathering about.
Don't care. Unless I can literally fire up a website find someone selling a fun and pay him cash in a parking lot for a gun the laws are not lax. Deal with it.
<Unless I can buy a gun from a petit-bourgeoisie dealer owning an online business then the gun laws are not lax
In a socialist society the guns come directly from socialist run factories or in some cases co-ops. There are no private second hand dealers. This is a stupid definition for "lax" because it necessitates some form of market and I can only guess you outlined this scenario to try to link markets to "freedom". Fuck off with that duplicitous shit.

Attached: cd2011a4142694e5a5169d401b3392bf52e927ce.jpg (73.01 KB, 870x864)

Jordan Wood
Jordan Wood

Chinese support is important, but crucial to Albania's defense is that the entire Albanian people are armed, have weapons. There are weapons in every village. Ten minutes after the alarm sounds, the entire population of a village must be ready for combat. There has never been any shortage of weapons in Albania, but never have the people been as armed as they are today.

That doesn't debunk anything I've said. If the ammo was stored in bunkers while the guns kept at home had no ammo then my point still stands.

Link me a source for Albanian laws regarding personal ownership under Hoxha. Could you keep ammo at home? Can you provide concrete proof?

Bullshit, if the state decided tomorrow that X person or group was a threat justifiable of confiscation, you bet your ass your "gun rights" would stop mattering in the slightest.

The ATF would have to do that. None of the sheriffs in my state will enforce such laws and there isn't a registry so good luck. I can make fully automatic guns in my state and the police will not come after you. Again, good luck enforcing that garbage.

In a socialist society the guns come directly from socialist run factories or in some cases co-ops.

So why did virtually all socialist states have extremely restrictive gun laws regarding private ownership? The only counter-examples you have are Albania in which the details of the law have still not been established, and former anarchist societies that were marred in civil war for the entirety of their existence. Passing extremely restrictive laws is counterproductive in such cases because they needed as many workers armed to fight the war. It's not like these societies existed in peacetime in which they could effectively pass policies that governed day to day life.

Absolutely weak examples. If you are a Yurofag than you certainly know about the EU directive that banned certain magazines because muzzies attacked Paris with illegal AKs. How come when the parliament was voting on this law, almost all the actual communist parties in Europe voted in favor, while almost all the opposition came from the nationalist right-wing parties? Fuck out of here.

Zachary Wood
Zachary Wood

That doesn't debunk anything I've said. If the ammo was stored in bunkers while the guns kept at home had no ammo then my point still stands.
Your source for what you've said is an 1984 times article with no link and no results when searched. Show me a proper source which states that Albanians could not keep ammo.
Link me a source for Albanian laws regarding personal ownership under Hoxha. Could you keep ammo at home? Can you provide concrete proof?
There are no real laws besides what we know which is that the government required the ownership of weapons and for families to keep caches. Albania has always been a gun-friendly country period, given its history of blood feuds and the sort and the expectation for individuals to defend their family during them. If large ammo deposits were kept in stores, it was most likely due to the fact that the Albanian government stressed thrift and austerity given its limited supplies to the point that it was a popular saying in the armed forces to "Hit the bull's eye with the first bullet."
The ATF would have to do that. None of the sheriffs in my state will enforce such laws and there isn't a registry so good luck. I can make fully automatic guns in my state and the police will not come after you. Again, good luck enforcing that garbage.
That obviously didn't stop multiple states from cracking down on communist and black liberation groups regardless faggot. The black panthers were allowed to own the firearms they owned, yet that didn't stop the local law enforcement from barging down their doors in the middle of the night, shooting the people inside, and taking their weapons.
So why did virtually all socialist states have extremely restrictive gun laws regarding private ownership? The only counter-examples you have are Albania in which the details of the law have still not been established, and former anarchist societies that were marred in civil war for the entirety of their existence. Passing extremely restrictive laws is counterproductive in such cases because they needed as many workers armed to fight the war. It's not like these societies existed in peacetime in which they could effectively pass policies that governed day to day life.
I like how you have this double standard in regards to socialist societies. We can't pass judgement on them or accept the gun ownership that existed because of the predicament they found themselves in, but suddenly we can pass judgement on them in predicaments which require restriction. We can't accept the example of when they have no laws restricting gun ownership due to civil war, but we can accept the example when they have gun restrictions due to the US funding terror cells and counter-revolutionary groups. You accept certain circumstances as legitimate for analysis and others as illegitimate for analysis. Fuck off.
It's not like these societies existed in peacetime in which they could effectively pass policies that governed day to day life.
There was no "peacetime" for any socialist state. Preparation for war and conflict was always.
Absolutely weak examples. If you are a Yurofag than you certainly know about the EU directive that banned certain magazines because muzzies attacked Paris with illegal AKs. How come when the parliament was voting on this law, almost all the actual communist parties in Europe voted in favor, while almost all the opposition came from the nationalist right-wing parties? Fuck out of here.
EU
Communists
I'm just going to ignore your usage of a capitalist super government (which contains Social Democrats at best) as an example. If we are talking about the "Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Council Directive 91/477/EEC on control of the acquisition and possession of weapons", then I believe you forgot to mention the "leftists" from the Czech Republic that occupy the council voted against it. votewatch.eu/en/term8-directive-of-the-european-parliament-and-of-the-council-amending-council-directive-91-477-eec-on-con.html#/##vote_list_tabs_content_2

Attached: aeb2d96b6630af142cb39e777d640d459f022fcde5d2500b366d291f04b7eb3a.jpg (57.68 KB, 825x635)

Juan Flores
Juan Flores

So you don't have a source, and the Wiki citation doesn't lead back to any sources, let's assume that gun laws were lax in Albania, as we don't have concrete information regardless.

This is literally one example. While there are a shitton of socialist states that had extremely restrictive gun laws. This is NAXALT at its finest.

That obviously didn't stop multiple states from cracking down on communist and black liberation groups regardless faggot. The black panthers were allowed to own the firearms they owned, yet that didn't stop the local law enforcement from barging down their doors in the middle of the night, shooting the people inside, and taking their weapons.

Here's the thing: When gun grabs happen by the right, they target a tiny minority. When its by the left, they target the vast majority of its regular citizenry. This is like pointing out Hitler grabbed guns from the commies and jews. No shit, they were an enemy to the state. However the VAST majority of Germans saw far laxer gun laws that was passed by the socialist democrats. Whereas Maoist China, the USSR, Cuba, Vietnam (after the war), Khmer Rogue, etc imposed very strict laws on the vast majority of the populace.

To deny the fact that the it isn't the right-wing who supports gun rights in most of the world is retarded. In Canada, it's the right-wing that supports looser laws, in the UK, it's the UKIP that supports unbanning handguns and semis, in Switzerland, again the right-wing, in Italy, the right-wing just loosened gun laws, in Brazil the same thing. In Germany it's the AfD that supports laxer gun laws. In Austria it's the FPO.

I can go on, and on.

hurr the ussr imposed draconian laws because of threats

The draconian laws remained well after the world wars. Tell me, why didn't the US impose such restrictions on the vast majority of the populace during the cold war? It also had commie agitators and whatnot. Yet when guns were grabbed as you stated, it targeted tiny groups like the black panthers and communist ones. Not the vast majority of regular citizenry.

Also it's funny how you bring up the Czech Republic. Most of the Czech "leftists" are only left-wing on economics, but easily right-wing on social issues and are quite nationalist. They don't want arabs or nogs in their country for a very good reason.

Lastly, as I originally stated, trusting leftists to uphold gun rights is retarded. Whether or not you want to admit it in almost every nation it's the right-wing parties who support gun rights while the leftist ones stand in opposition be it the fucking socdems, greens, m-l parties, etc. The only example that goes against this is the Czech Republic, and again their "leftists" are quite right-wing socially.

Have the last reply faggot.

Brayden King
Brayden King

than strict ones passed by the socialist democrats

Thomas Cox
Thomas Cox

Attached: quote-under-no-pretext-should-arms-and-ammunition-be-surrendered-any-attempt-to-disarm-the-karl-marx-84-63-91.jpg (55.52 KB, 850x400)

Lucas Scott
Lucas Scott

This is like pointing out Hitler grabbed guns from the commies and jews. No shit, they were an enemy to the state.
good to know you aren't worth arguing

Christopher Jenkins
Christopher Jenkins

So you don't have a source, and the Wiki citation doesn't lead back to any sources, let's assume that gun laws were lax in Albania, as we don't have concrete information regardless
My source states that everyone owned firearms and that they moved freely in between villages and people, and you tried to counter this by saying "oh but wait, what about the ammunition" with a source which has no link.
Here's the thing: When gun grabs happen by the right, they target a tiny minority. When its by the left, they target the vast majority of its regular citizenry. This is like pointing out Hitler grabbed guns from the commies and jews. No shit, they were an enemy to the state. However the VAST majority of Germans saw far laxer gun laws that was passed by the socialist democrats. Whereas Maoist China, the USSR, Cuba, Vietnam (after the war), Khmer Rogue, etc imposed very strict laws on the vast majority of the populace.
So when Hitler targets specific minorities because they are identifiable, this is ok. But when the USSR is forced to pass restrictions because it is dealing with a clandestine threat that is not easily identifiable and can not be easily filtered out, this is not ok? Jeez, I wonder why you would think that.
The draconian laws remained well after the world wars. Tell me, why didn't the US impose such restrictions on the vast majority of the populace during the cold war? It also had commie agitators and whatnot. Yet when guns were grabbed as you stated, it targeted tiny groups like the black panthers and communist ones. Not the vast majority of regular citizenry.
See above.
Also it's funny how you bring up the Czech Republic. Most of the Czech "leftists" are only left-wing on economics, but easily right-wing on social issues and are quite nationalist. They don't want arabs or nogs in their country for a very good reason.
That's a bullshit backpedal and you know it. A sizeable portion of those leftists that are from the Czech Republic are DemSoc to boot.
To deny the fact that the it isn't the right-wing who supports gun rights in most of the world is retarded. In Canada, it's the right-wing that supports looser laws, in the UK, it's the UKIP that supports unbanning handguns and semis, in Switzerland, again the right-wing, in Italy, the right-wing just loosened gun laws, in Brazil the same thing. In Germany it's the AfD that supports laxer gun laws. In Austria it's the FPO.
Not only is this grouping a lot of different right-wing groups together, but it's also ignoring that a majority of those governments have literally no communist opposition in their governments. Your only comparison to those right-wing groups are liberals and SocDems. The vast majority of communist groups in the world are pro-gun, but very few of them are in government at all so there really isn't much they can do. Fucking of course communists don't have weight in government, they're barely in any government in the first place.
Lastly, as I originally stated, trusting leftists to uphold gun rights is retarded. Whether or not you want to admit it in almost every nation it's the right-wing parties who support gun rights while the leftist ones stand in opposition be it the fucking socdems, greens, m-l parties, etc. The only example that goes against this is the Czech Republic, and again their "leftists" are quite right-wing socially.
First, SocDems and greens are not considered on the "left". Second, the number of ML's in government anywhere in the western world I can count on one hand, so I have no idea how they would be able to "stand in opposition". Third, "the Czech Republic might be somewhat left, but here's the reason they really aren't" is not an argument. And fourth, far-right groups supporting ownership for the majority racial/ethnic/ideological group but not for certain minorities is what simplifies their situation given it aligns with their ideology. Communists have no such "luxury" if you can call it that. This is what we mean by saying that your "rights" mean nothing. You'll exclude a portion of the popualtion , and then state "but hey, we gave the right to most people, so it means we support your right to ownership (as long as you fulfill the condition of being the majority ethnic group and support the far-right government)!" It's a duplitious two faced argument that tries to divert the focus away from the intent completely. It tries to move attention away from the reasoning, just like you try to do to communist governments so you can try to pretend those reasons don't matter or that the conditions are parallel to each other. Fuck off your dishonest underhanded bullshit you duplicitous cunt.

Luis Harris
Luis Harris

I used to be very pro-gun, anti-control, whatever. But now that's so obviously dumb with all the Orwellian "mass shooter drill" hysteria going on, drilling the population for a massive police state that they will be coaxed into believing is necessary, I would be fine with it. Anyone who thinks that you've made progress just because you've bought a gun and ammunition is a bit of a LARPer who shares the same fetishization of firearms as the right-wing militias or Nazis that think if they display their cool outfits enough it's a positive for the movement. I don't think so. People really don't give a shit until you start looking like an army, open-carry* firearms draw negative attention, and overall it's just not where the masses are at. Security for demonstrations and whatever, fine.

Nolan Parker
Nolan Parker

Daily reminder that Fred Hampton's BPP chapter made an explicit attempt at trying to shrug off their "armed" image during their massive growth in Chicago.

Ryder Morgan
Ryder Morgan

Why do liberals think the police are going to protect them?
Armed community defense >> police, especially for marginalized people because they are just as likely to get shot by cops as their assailants.
Chicago is gae.

Colton Ross
Colton Ross

he thinks he is actually going to fight a civil war against modern state
A revolution is not a dinner party.
-also Mao

Wyatt Cook
Wyatt Cook

I honestly think gun control as an issue is directly related to how close you are to a major metropolitan center. There's a real psychological impact on a community that large, the vast majority of people you pass on the street you will never utter another word to in your life or even ever lay eyes on again, there's a fundamental lack of trust there and most people would probably just rather everyone be under the boot than worry about everyone they pass on the street.

Ryder Bell
Ryder Bell

Believing the bourg will let you go to walmart and stock up for the revolution smacks of muh american dream idealism tbh
Except you can literally already do that

David Gutierrez
David Gutierrez

You can still get a gun under gun control dweeb. When has crime ever gone down, or police brutality for that matter, ever gone down because the black community had more guns? It's a fetishization of the firearm that has zero gumption in the strategic reality that not all force has to be applied by guns, and very frequently, premature armed violence and fetishization has spelt the death of several U.S. left-wing movements.

Chase Sullivan
Chase Sullivan

atleast it makes you look cool, shutup user.

Xavier Gray
Xavier Gray

hi fbi

Nicholas Taylor
Nicholas Taylor

You can still get a gun under gun control dweeb. When has crime ever gone down, or police brutality for that matter, ever gone down because the black community had more guns?
I mean, it has objectively reduced the rate of certain crimes and there is no proof it raises the total actual homicide rate higher than it already was, and in some studies it has in fact reduces it. Also, the police brutality argument it retarded. What, do you think the police will suddenly STOP being brutal if we have less firearms? Fuck off with that shit.

Tyler Walker
Tyler Walker

more lefties with guns, less righties with guns.

Liam Wright
Liam Wright

as long as the opposition promises not to skin prisoners alive i will fight in the revolution i swear no jokey dokey

Gabriel Parker
Gabriel Parker

You left out suicide which I think is the largest cause of gun death after gang members killing each other.

Christopher Miller
Christopher Miller

most communist parties worldwide are pro gun
link a single source for this. almost all communist regimes had strict gun laws. albania is an exception.

Carson Scott
Carson Scott

The communists in Canada are against further gun control, with the caveat being that authority figures in all branches of government (police, military enforcement, teachers, etc.) should be less armed.
canada.isidewith.com/political-parties/ca-communist/domestic-policy
The ICFI is against gun control and have been highly critical of the Democrats attempt to implement it
wsws.org/en/articles/2018/03/16/pers-m16.html
The League for the Fourth International is against gun control and wrote an article criticizing those who call themselves socialist and stand for it
internationalist.org/opportunistsaiddemocratsguncontrol1804.html
On that topic the, the CPUSA (which is largely agknowledged as a CIA run honeypot) stated they're in support for gun control a while back which caused them to receive flak from nearly every communist group of every tendency in the US. So you try to sort that one out.
The PSL, despite being garbage most of the time, are against gun control because they see I told as targeting minority groups mostly and not addressing the core issues behind gun violence. The rest of their reasoning is what you'd expect of the PSL, but they do go as far as being against background check, which is more then you can say for most conservative groups.
To say that that the PFLP or the RPCP in Palestine are for gun control is laughable. TBH, to say any armed middle eastern communist group is for gun control is laughable, but someone who knows more about the entire region may know of a few.
We've already been over the communist groups in the Czech Republic.

And on the topic of "all regimes", there is no actual proof Mao banned or resticted public gun ownership during his term at all and no such laws resticting them exist. Guns were only confiscated from the public under Deng.

Hunter Gonzalez
Hunter Gonzalez

If you're an american it really doesn't matter either way. The two sides of the debate are white vigilantes itching to kill communists or letting fascist police and military have a monopoly on violence. We'll always be outgunned until like, america is occupied by a foreign power or something.

Anthony Green
Anthony Green

Holy fuck, gun nuts really need to stop trying to pretend their psycopathy is serious politics.
REEEEE leftists only want COLLECTIVE wielding of guns through organized militias instead of letting me hoard machine guns in my attic and garage!
Seriously, why the fuck do you care? It's just using guns for an actual purpose. Next you're gonna cry that not being able to own a train because they're used for collectivist judeo-bolshevik public transportation is totalitarian.

Attached: workers-take-rifle.jpg (105.32 KB, 660x880)

Aaron Torres
Aaron Torres

and what about when technology makes firearms obsolete? way more destruction can be achieved with directed energy weapons.. arms are not the problem

Grayson Bailey
Grayson Bailey

I see no reason to keep legal guns around. I'll never have to worry about someone busting into my house, since I'm not a fucking schizo.
The guns we need are best managed in the hands of surreptitious militia.

Nicholas Morris
Nicholas Morris

just do what albania did and give everyone a gun and tell them that if they commit a mass shooting their bodies will be buried along their victims, no blood feuds will ever happen

Brody Reyes
Brody Reyes

what about laser guns huh ever think of that
this is just stupid.

Jack Jenkins
Jack Jenkins

Gun control is the best filter for sorting neoliberal "soc"dems from actual socialists

David Phillips
David Phillips

it has objectively reduced the rate of certain crimes

Literally zero proof.

There's been legal gun ownership for centuries in America and none of it has been used for a political purpose unless deployed in service of petty-bourgeois white supremacy. There was a neo-Nazi group (Identity Evropa) who was found out to have a member on the board of the NRA, even. The point is that guns at this point only serve the interests of the people who want to do genocide or protect their dictator from being couped, and at the current material conditions in America are wholly unneeded. Socialist Rifle Association is just a social club around firearms, with more emphasis on social than the actual shooting. After all, it's a non-profit that just teaches people security at protests at most. This is completely unrelated to the massive issues in the American system currently, such as healthcare, voter suppression, poverty, immigration, etc where there is objectively NO armed struggle.

Evan Ramirez
Evan Ramirez

Britain has it right but that position is in many ways historically determined and not fit for implementation elsewhere in the modern day. Nonetheless, it should be pursued in the USA to the fullest possible degree because US gun culture is cancer even if the guns themselves are just slabs of metal that make slabs of metal go fast.
Taking the inverse track to many users here, I would take the position that gun control is more desirable before socialism/communism than after it. The time and resources set free by radical social transformation would leave much more time available for figuring out how to roll back restrictions on ownership without causing social ills.

A lot of Zig Forums seem to purely oppose gun control because it's a wedge issue they can jump at to distinguish themselves from liberals for little real cost, which I'd say belays a sort of insecurity in their own ideological position. I'm not sure whether this is more the case for Americans who have never fired a gun (where gun control is an active issue) or for people in countries with low gun ownership and strong restrictions who can use it to imagine themselves more revolutionary while sleeping happily at night knowing they're more likely to be hit by a falling Russian satellite than by a bullet, nor am I sure I would want to share the mindset of a philosophical coward or psychopath long enough to come to a conclusion.

Camden Hughes
Camden Hughes

Literally zero proof.
justfacts.com/guncontrol.asp

Austin Bailey
Austin Bailey

Someone post that meme about how the PRC didn't have gun laws until after Mao's death and George Washington seized guns from farmers because they didn't want to pay their taxes

Bentley Evans
Bentley Evans

Here
Search engines exist though user

Attached: ae55722y2wo01.jpg (95.74 KB, 801x768)

Jose Peterson
Jose Peterson

using search engine to look for an image, let alone a meme

Charles Torres
Charles Torres

Attached: 88c.jpg (135.27 KB, 1024x1202)

Jordan Barnes
Jordan Barnes

Attached: nysvbekou.jpg (16.27 KB, 940x1024)

Tyler Davis
Tyler Davis

Everything < 20mm should be completely unregulated

Attached: 791924af0923c10ec6d6591e7eebb55312fd8dda27c59d472ea984497238b969.jpg (102.89 KB, 504x464)

Noah Phillips
Noah Phillips

Under communism, guns would be useless.
Shooting is a nice sport though

Nathan Long
Nathan Long

The FBi is overwhelming liberal
What world do you live in man?
MLK
BP
fucking tree-hugging hippies

They are anything but.

Daniel Nelson
Daniel Nelson

succdem is for disarming

Classic

Lucas Diaz
Lucas Diaz

noflag post is boring
more classical than Mozart and Bortniansky combined.

Gavin Anderson
Gavin Anderson

Everything < 120mm should be completely unregulated
fixed that for you.

Ian Rodriguez
Ian Rodriguez

The people can not only have the right to arm themselves with rifle and musket. They must have cannons!
Reminder that the Paris Commune was partially instigated by the confiscation of 400 neighbourhood-paid cannons by the national government.

Attached: paris-commune-1871-granger.jpg (240.82 KB, 900x637)

Grayson Nguyen
Grayson Nguyen

I really think we should be looking at the development of light, medium, and even heavy mortars. They're inexpensive simple tools that work extremely well with the modern technical, and are often similar in end effect to their heavier howitzer analogues, a 120mm mortar has similar explosive weight to a 155mm artillery cannon, the extra size is needed in the cannon just to add mass to the shell of the projectile for its extreme internal pressures.

It really is worth looking into things like the barrack busters by the IRA, especially the extreme 320mm version that destroyed two helicopters.

Jaxson Thomas
Jaxson Thomas

not allowing rounds that are capable of stopping tanks

hmmmm

Hunter Perry
Hunter Perry

Gun control is the single best purity test for leftism that there is, IMO.

Liberals arguing for gun control is like democrats arguing to expand military power right now.
<"Trump is a Putin puppet and traiter to the US! …give him more resources to fight his wars!"
<"Cops are abusive and racist who will shoot you if they have the barest suspicion of a gun! …give them the task of taking people's guns away!"

Attached: IMG-20190302-080824.jpg (84.93 KB, 958x1024)

David Stewart
David Stewart

i can't tell the stance of this post or pic, are you saying tru leftists are pro-gun, or that because liberals and democrats (not leftists) are pro-gun-control that means the left as a whole is pro-gun-control

Levi Torres
Levi Torres

Literally every citizen of a socialist state should receive military training and be given guns. Counterrevolutionaries, reactionaries, and imperialist invaders stand little chance if every single person living there has the ability and training to kill them.

Tyler Reyes
Tyler Reyes

Fascists want to murder us communists, quite literally. A large number of them want to kill ethnic or racial minorities.

Gun ownership serves the interests of those being targeted. Fascists can still kill us with or without guns, but guns certainly help us defend against physically stronger opponents, or groups that outnumber us.

Lincoln Ortiz
Lincoln Ortiz

Leftists should be pro gun because most of the rationale around gun control is deeply flawed.

Colton Rogers
Colton Rogers

gun control is a yank/LARP test tbh

Lucas Robinson
Lucas Robinson

Gun ownership serves the interests of those being targeted

This is 2nd Amendment glazed-eye patriotic-sounding anti-authority stuff that has literally no basis in reality when you consider Native American tribes, escaped slaves, the Reconstruction period, Jim Crow race riots, etc. And the fact that it assumes that guns will be banned, which they won't.

The point of the matter is that firearms fetishization is a bourgeois deviation from the actual question of struggle in the popular classes. You think if everyone was packing in the baptist church that Dylan Roof shot up would actually be some sort of defense against white supremacy? Cool. Can't wait for Glock or Springfield to donate all the cash they made from 300 pistol purchases to the subliminally white supremacist NRA so they can keep arming right-wing militia groups. There is no question of power or struggle, it's just vague calls for bourgeois-legal rights to be bestowed equally on radicals. This is something that you have to realize: you will never legally have more guns, or be able to use those guns in a political manner. It's banned by the U.S. Government and the militias who do it have ties to the state. It is an objective strategic reality which all militant socialists must recognize in order to not be violently disconnected from a social base, or perhaps alienated from that social base for plainly wrong political lines. This is why, for all of SRA's cred, all they're really doing is training people for basic self-defense (a practical skill which almost everyone practices at one point) and not much else.

Alexander Stewart
Alexander Stewart

The thing to emphasize here: The SRA is training people in practical skills. There's no higher political calling here except for the perceived need for firearms of the political movement itself growing and needing protection, just as all political organizations need for their demonstrations at one point.

Ethan Davis
Ethan Davis

Marx was referring to an arming of the workers to overthrow capitalism. That text is not about an individual right to bear arms

The workers are made up of individuals. BOOM, get dunked

Henry Murphy
Henry Murphy

Socdems being classcuck statists as usual

Connor Ward
Connor Ward

Switzerland is a shithole full of evil gnomes change my mind

Brayden Diaz
Brayden Diaz

The 2nd Amendment is about the organization of civil militias, a question that is important to socialists because the class content of armed men has political implications for class power. Depending on circumstance, the arming of a civil militia can either strengthen or weaken bourgeois or proletarian power, and the question of armament should always be centered by which class benefits. The fact that the US militia was borne of colonial property relations, which no longer exist so “American freedom” as Lenin describes (and praises) was moot even by his time, does not condemn their use as the basis for a socialist popular militia, as Communism as a movement attempts to find freedom in superceeding necessity. Lenin, afterall, understood imperialism as moribund capitalism not out of some utopian apocalyptism but because Lenin saw in imperialism a society pregnant with socialism. Even a bourgeois militia can provide the groundwork for a universal army.

Ryder James
Ryder James

I couldn't find much, but I did come up with this.

<Under the dictatorship of Enver Hoxha, which lasted from 1941-1985, gun ownership was tightly controlled, with shooting the preserve of Hoxha and his cronies.

qz.com/641493/how-hunting-became-a-form-of-dissent-in-albania/

Albania has always been a gun-friendly country period, given its history of blood feuds and the sort and the expectation for individuals to defend their family during them.

Then that would have to be accounted for as well. If they had an extremely open culture regarding guns, then the fact that they were less restrictive than other communist countries doesn't hold much weight. If the United States were to become some type of totalitarian state, they would probably also be relatively lax compared to most other totalitarian countries in this one regard.

Gavin Brooks
Gavin Brooks

Under the dictatorship of Enver Hoxha, which lasted from 1941-1985, gun ownership was tightly controlled, with shooting the preserve of Hoxha and his cronies.
But that's actually objectively untrue. We even have video of Albanians at shooting ranges m.youtube.com/watch?v=6v_z48do7NQ. It wasn't relegated simply to "Hoxha and his cronies", unless the entirety of the Albanian communist population are to be viewed as "cronies".

Kayden Stewart
Kayden Stewart

A lot of Zig Forums seem to purely oppose gun control because it's a wedge issue they can jump at to distinguish themselves from liberals for little real cost

I would honestly be more concerned that they want gun freedoms for current circumstances, but would then want to clamp down on them in their ideal society.

This is similar to somebody like Richard Spencer saying that there would not be free speech in his ideal society, but complaining about his own free speech being infringed in the current one.

That doesn't demonstrate anything, especially as all the firearms looked identical. It was some type of formal training, it's doubtful they even owned those guns.

Nathan Carter
Nathan Carter

Re China. This is from the Library of Congress.

Firearms are very tightly controlled in China. Firearms control has been in place for most of the history of the People’s Republic of China (PRC). Only about twenty months after the formal establishment of the PRC, the Provisional Measures on Firearms Control were published on June 27, 1951 (Provisional Measures).[1] Many of the articles in the Provisional Measures were designed to identify and gain control of the large number of firearms that were within the territory of China at the time as a result of the long period of civil war that ended with the Chinese Communist Party’s victory in 1949. For example, there was a provision authorizing public security organs (police) at all levels to take an inventory of all the firearms in the area, and permits could then be issued to those authorized to have firearms.[2]

Under the Provisional Measures, aside from military personnel, government officials of a certain rank who needed firearms for their duties and who obtained approval from higher-level supervisors could receive authorization to carry guns. Faculty and students in nonmilitary schools and personnel in publicly owned factories, stores, enterprises, and mass organizations could carry guns if doing so was necessary for the performance of their duties, as long as they obtained approval from certain high-level government organs.[3] Privately operated enterprises were allowed to keep the guns they already had if they reported the guns for registration with the public security organs, were approved, and were issued licenses.[4] The “firearms” regulated in the Provisional Measures were rifles, carbines, pistols, and all other kinds of long or short guns, with the exception of hunting rifles.[5]

loc.gov/law/help/firearms-control/china.php

That tells you what the laws are, it doesn't tell you how they were actually implemented, which is the real story.

Connor Price
Connor Price

Just finished going to the range last week yet you say this. I guess all we do is just talk.

Dominic Jones
Dominic Jones

China, North Korea, Cuba, and Vietnam have strict gun control.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overview_of_gun_laws_by_nation
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Estimated_number_of_civilian_guns_per_capita_by_country

Elijah Ross
Elijah Ross

especially as all the firearms looked identical.
Country who's only firearms are whatever is shipped to it or that it produces itself within it's borders has a populace armed with identical/similar looking firearms
I'm shocked
It was some type of formal training, it's doubtful they even owned those guns.
It's literally a recreational shooting range. Again though, what do you mean by owned? Do you mean access at any time, or have in house. There was both to my knowledge.
Library of Congress
Can't even find the law anywhere else
rupe-india.org/59/han.html

Mason Baker
Mason Baker

Country who's only firearms are whatever is shipped to it or that it produces itself within it's borders has a populace armed with identical/similar looking firearms

There were multiple small arms made within the Soviet bloc, plus a large assortment of guns from before the war. I'm anti-communist, and I'll acknowledge that the Eastern Bloc made outstanding firearms. The Czech republic to this day makes some of the best handguns in the world.

It's literally a recreational shooting range.

There were no signs that it was something where regular people from different age ranges would go and shoot their guns.

Can't even find the law anywhere else

I don't know what you mean by this. Are you saying it's not true? I don't think that they would lie about Maoist China today unless it was a lie the United States previously had invested in.

Attached: 15z-CZ75B9mm-L-91102-01102.png (525.65 KB, 1920x1435)
Attached: nagant-revolver.jpg (1.37 MB, 1793x1080)
Attached: Tokarev-TT-33-made-in-1938.jpg (325.57 KB, 3000x2250)

Parker Bell
Parker Bell

within the Soviet bloc
I'll acknowledge that the Eastern Bloc made outstanding firearms.
Albania wasn't Soviet aligned post-1961 user.
There were no signs that it was something where regular people from different age ranges would go and shoot their guns.
I mean, there is an older woman, three younger woman, and two younger guys in the back near the woman at the end. That seems like a range of different people to me.
I don't think that they would lie about Maoist China today unless it was a lie the United States previously had invested in.
I'm no Maoist, but even I know that the US fabricates and has fabricated a lot of information regarding it.

Lucas Campbell
Lucas Campbell

Going to the range isn't armed struggle lol.

Aaron Lee
Aaron Lee

I'm arguing that in the present time there's no strategic use for it or viable alternatives for class struggle based on firearms. I think it would do much better if socialists focused on the necessity of the working-class to fight for itself and create its own demands on an organized basis (through the party form, or some sort of movement, whatever may come) which I would then believe would make the issue of militias actually important. However the discussion is mired not by the actual ways in which instruments can be yielded, but about an extremely stupid multi-billion dollar debacle in the halls of Capitol Hill where leftists have decided to parrot word-for-word the same exact talking points as Republicans instead of concretely analyzing the use of firearms.I hope some posters on here will understand the effect that this creates, where instead of thoughts on the issue, there's a groupthink line that people repeat without end. Unironically, I think this is bourgeois ideology.

Sebastian Gomez
Sebastian Gomez

Albania wasn't Soviet aligned post-1961 user.

Did they sanction them to the point where they couldn't even buy firearms? I think that's really unlikely. Yugoslavia stood alone, but they also traded with the Warsaw Pact.

I mean, there is an older woman, three younger woman, and two younger guys in the back near the woman at the end. That seems like a range of different people to me.

I don't know who the older woman is or why she was there. I saw a bunch of young people with identical weapons. Plus, this is a propaganda film, though I grant that maybe they didn't care much about making it look like it was easy to own weapons.

I'm no Maoist, but even I know that the US fabricates and has fabricated a lot of information regarding it.

I don't think LOC would lie about the specifics of Chinese policy from the Maoist era today, that's all, unless it is some specific issue that they conspicuously lied about in the past. China is more-or-less a US ally.

Ayden Watson
Ayden Watson

Did they sanction them to the point where they couldn't even buy firearms? I think that's really unlikely. Yugoslavia stood alone, but they also traded with the Warsaw Pact.
The Albanian-Soviet break was as hard as you could make one between two previously "friendly" countries. All aid and trade was stopped with the SU declaring that Albania could no longer expect economic relations equivalent to those before in the future. Soviet projects in Albania were halted and all materials, equipment, and arms that were intended for Albania (and which it had planned to receive already) ceased in its entirety. China signed a deal with Albania during the affair and proceeded to pick up the slack where the USSR left off, taking over 90% of the trade and aid the USSR would have provided. Nearly everything Albania received from that point forward were Chinese materials and arms (which they allegedly disliked the quality of) and whatever they made in country.
I don't know who the older woman is or why she was there.
First one, appears middle aged.
Plus, this is a propaganda film
Is every documentary showing a communist country in a light that isn't literal black skies and ghettos propaganda to you
I don't think LOC would lie about the specifics of Chinese policy from the Maoist era today, that's all, unless it is some specific issue that they conspicuously lied about in the past. China is more-or-less a US ally.
Not Maoist China, and certainly not communism period. The US's relationship with Dengist China is tepid at best as well.

Joseph Mitchell
Joseph Mitchell

countries
meant allies

Ryder Mitchell
Ryder Mitchell

This is like pointing out Hitler grabbed guns from the commies and jews. No shit, they were an enemy to the state.
At least you idiots are just openly coming out as fascists now. There's no point in continuing to pretend that this has anything to do with individual liberties or whatever the disingenuous buzzword of the day is.

Attached: gee-I-wonder-who-could-be-behind-this-post.jpg (60.65 KB, 491x491)

John Powell
John Powell

The people who think banning guns works are the same mouthbreathers who say dumb shit like "Don't teach women self defense, teach Straight-White-Christian-UpperMiddleClass-BoogeyMen to not rape!"

Liberal =/= Leftist.

Progressives are brainless idiots and a detriment to our cause.

Ayden Sanchez
Ayden Sanchez

I lived in a communist country and never understood that. Why would you be scared of your fellow men carrying guns in the open to protect your fellow man or to protect society? If there is a dispute it is ended quickly because everybody has gun but government is difficult on rules so it is difficult to say who is right and who is wrong. Why do americans feels pistols are more scary than ar15 when ar15 is more violent than pistol? Also is this also a communist board or is people also looking for alternative news that is not fascist?

Jaxson Smith
Jaxson Smith

gun control quite literally works though.
the question of whether it would work in the USA is completely separate to whether it's worked almost everywhere else, which it has.

Mason Anderson
Mason Anderson

knife crimes in the U.K and being isolated from NAFTA causing drug lords to yeet shit over the border never happened

Attached: Depends-on-who-you-ask--0a56c66377278312245ed8de4d99f7fe.jpg (47.76 KB, 500x281)

Lucas Perez
Lucas Perez

knife crimes in the U.K
lmao i love this one
1. murders using knifes are more common in the US than UK
2. please list every mass stabbing in UK history. (Go on, I'll even let you count the war of the roses.)

yankie boy loves his freudian dong substitute.

Wyatt Harris
Wyatt Harris

euronews.com/2018/05/05/trump-s-knife-crime-claim-how-do-the-us-and-uk-compare-
Knife killings are higher per million
U.S has 261.16 million more people spread across a fucking continent
U.K isn't even the size of Ohio and a stabbing is like 5 feet from you

Attached: pokemon-sword-and-shield-new-british-pokemon-fanart-welwel-wotsall-and-disden.jpg (10.87 KB, 200x200)

Jace Myers
Jace Myers

Knife murders are also higher stateside: there were 4.96 homicides “due to knives or cutting instruments” in the US for every million of population in 2016.
In Britain there were 3.26 homicides involving a sharp instrument per million people in the year from April 2016 to March 2017.
so are you illiterate or did you just stab out your eye?

Attached: big-brain-academy.jpg (61.78 KB, 500x448)

Michael Brooks
Michael Brooks

In Britain there were 3.26 homicides involving a sharp instrument per million people in the year from April 2016 to March 2017.
All located on a small island

Attached: 6d70fa4e0089f7a2e5e33826479dbd2e2870fa84r1-576-1064v2-hq.jpg (43.11 KB, 554x1024)

Noah Barnes
Noah Barnes

All located on a small island
it's a per million figure.
also: the fact the UK is smaller and geographically closer makes it baffling that the US would manage to achieve a higher rate per million people given how much of the population live in areas that only exist to justify longer range airplanes.

Aiden Hall
Aiden Hall

A random dumbass walking around in public thinking he can, as you say, solve disputes with a gun, is fucking scary. What the fuck kind of disputes would be solved by everyone having a gun? Your post is a giant mess. I also didn't say pistols are worse than ar15's.

Nolan Morgan
Nolan Morgan

it's a per million figure.
You have less space to fill so I'd assume the feeling of terror is more prominent and claustrophobic . It's probably partially why this is an actual issue compared to the U.S

Attached: 98n193gax0m01.jpg (8.83 KB, 240x240)

Charles Sullivan
Charles Sullivan

you'd assume wrong, which isn't surprising given your consistent track record of being wrong. fuck off and watch the superbowl or something.

Bentley Peterson
Bentley Peterson

you'd assume wrong, which isn't surprising given your consistent track record of being wrong
what the fuck did i do to you
fuck off and watch the superbowl or something.
"fuck off and go watch the equally boring nations football stereotypes are fun tbh

Gavin Richardson
Gavin Richardson

I support gun ownership under socialism. Especially rifles. However I really don't like how it operates in American capitalist society. At the very least veterans shouldn't be permitted to own guns due to their penchant for murdering civilians.

Attached: 1531351210988.png (544.84 KB, 716x757)

Brandon Ward
Brandon Ward

Free AK-47s for every one ! If a country challenges global capitalism it needs a strong militant backbone.
I am not even talking about mandatory conscription but having everyone go through a basic fire arms course in exchange for a free AK seems like a fair compromise.

Attached: AK-CHAN.png (475.26 KB, 1024x1024)

Jason Davis
Jason Davis

I want people who want to shoot me for ideological reasons to own guns legally. I don't want criminal underworld thugs to illegally own guns to silence me or someone else who knows too much. I don't want the state or creepy private security companies run by bond-villain types to have a monopoly on arms.

Not that there is anyone who would kill me over an ideological reason except maybe a retarded brainwashed ISIS guy who was put up to it by The Authorities The Suspect Was Known To. Just look up all the FBI "stings" where they got a "Muslim" alcoholic pothead retard kid to a quarry and did a whole elaborate entrapment scheme where they give them a fake bomb truck and arrest them after they hit the clacker and they brazenly show this on the news. What's to stop black operators in SAD/SOG carrying out such an operation where the bomb is real and you never see the mentors who radicalized the stupid kid and it goes down in history as lone wolf?

The problem with 2A and gun ownership, which is really about pre-empting a tyrannical state, is kids. No one can handwave that horror subjected to undeveloped minds who don't know what the death rattle blood-snore is or that if an AR-15 hits the head in a certain way it looks like this at 16:05 youtube.com/watch?v=GT71lOZBB3w for real like that's what it looks like. Not to mention DMT torture when you die from battlefield wounds displacing adrenal glands and GABA receptors.

Why did this all start in the 90s all of a sudden? It's far too convenient. The Dunblane Massacre was a genuine Sandy Hook and that I know. A master mason molesting kids who got reported by a parent and there was suspicions over politicians and army generals visiting the school. He had correspondence with the queen before his mass murder-suicide. Come the fuck off it. I think the constant school shootings today are media instigated. Why the fuck are most of the mass murders people shooting random kids? It's drilled into them by a PsyOp, glorification and oxygen for the perps just like those "lone wolf" terrorists have the idea to carry it out drilled in by SAD/SOG who want more civil liberties removed.

Attached: 9753975907530.png (2.12 MB, 1190x1600)

Cooper Ross
Cooper Ross

The weird shit about wounds I said:

I'm not saying you have to know about that I'm saying being an adult mentally prepares you for it. When you find your closest family member hanging from a noose turned blue and the dark 'black tar' feeling of horror you can testify that other negative shit in more sheltered people's lives is just as bad and sometimes even worse. Like experiencing attrition at a shitty job or finding out you were being manipulated by a friend, there is actual parity there despite what you might believe. Kids don't grow up to harden to those things and you're laying horrors on an innocent mind that aren't the same horrors when experienced by say, me, no matter how snarky and 2cool they act in their teens.

Dylan Brooks
Dylan Brooks

thank you based schizo user!

Noah Gray
Noah Gray

gun control quite literally works though.
There is no proof that gun control drops the total homicide or crime rate by any significant amount. Also, when you take the stats of gun related homicides in countries like the US and remove self-inflicted homicide and homicide done in self defense (which are both counted for the total gun homicide rate), you find that the rate of purposeful homicide done with a firearm is quite low (compared to the number of firearms) and even lower for rifles and other non-handgun firearms. Then when you compare the total amount of yearly purposeful firearm homicides and compare it to homicides in total, you also find that firearm homicides are rather low comparatively to all other forms of homicide grouped together.
cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr67/nvsr67_05.pdf

Something that is a good predictor for crime and homicide though is access to healthcare, public services, and quality of life. Take Vermont for instance. Vermont has a robust healthcare system (even with the rollback of the single payer), quality public services and a high quality of life. They also have some of the most lax gun laws in the country. Yet purposeful homicide and crime is very low. Now lets compare this to say California and Alabama, one having strict gun laws and the other lax. Both have an extremely high rate of homicide. Both also have extremely shitty public services, barely any regard for healthcare, and a low quality of life especially within the poorer neighborhoods. This is also consequently why many European countries have a lower homicide rate in total, due to many of them having universal healthcare services and a higher quality life (comparatively).
inb4 "But crimes relating to mental health are low in the US"
Reminder that the US does not count impulsive behavior, anger, high-stress, problematic alcohol use, the depression felt from job loss or family loss/break up, and other environmentally caused factors as mental health issues. It is only counted as a mental health issue if there is a medical diagnosis before the homicide (or during trial) and that medical diagnosis finds the individual to have a clinical mental disorder (like schizophrenia or bipolar disorder).

Attached: AusGuns.png (57.66 KB, 489x437)

Easton Sullivan
Easton Sullivan

So when's the number of armed left wing americans going to outnumber the numbers of armed right wing? How is that going to happen, concretely? Lots of posturing going on here, IMO.

Robert Diaz
Robert Diaz

So when's the number of armed left wing americans going to outnumber the numbers of armed right wing?
Depends what you mean by "left wing". If you mean liberals, then never. If you mean socialists, then not for a while given that leftists make up a minuscule portion of the population currently. The fact that the number of leftists is extremely small is not a pretext to surrender weapons mind you, and pretty much every major communist group (save the CPUSA, we're not counting CIA honeypots here) is aware of this.

Landon Sanchez
Landon Sanchez

The number of UNARMED left wing Americans is outnumbered by the armed right wing, so uh, probably never. America is fucked.

Mason Miller
Mason Miller

a based schizo poster just flew over my house

Liam Torres
Liam Torres

scotsman.com/news/question-on-masonic-links-left-dunblane-inquiry-chief-stunned-1-1099013

he dropped this and a glowing melaninated just hovered over me in a black helicopter? coincidence? i think not

Dominic Rogers
Dominic Rogers

cuckdem supports subjugating the proletarian because "it's 2019 guys get with the program"
What a surprise . . .

Christian Foster
Christian Foster

There is no proof that gun control drops the total homicide or crime rate by any significant amount
It does however drop the gun crime rate in any country capable of actually enforcing gun control.
I mean it's true that other factors are more relevant, but one great way to focus on those other factors is not to have a bunch of LARPing small state militiamen jumping around. (Those people being the actual primary purchasers of guns outside the military, not would-be proletarian revolutionaries that exist only in the heads and hearts of the delusional and the virtue signalling.)

yugo LARPs
what a surprise. . .

Nolan Roberts
Nolan Roberts

Show how gun control doesn't actually drop the total crime or homicide rate significantly in any way
"It drops the gun crime rate tho"
Fucking amazing arguments you're making here succdem. "Controlling firearms does next to nothing to total crime, but we should do it anyway because this specific subset of that total crime could go down and be replaced by other crime I'm ok with". We should just ban kitchenware while we're at it, it might drop crime committed with knives too.
but one great way to focus on those other factors is not to have a bunch of LARPing small state militiamen jumping around. (Those people being the actual primary purchasers of guns outside the military, not would-be proletarian revolutionaries that exist only in the heads and hearts of the delusional and the virtue signalling.)
<Only the liberal bourgeoisie government should have guns and no one else, don't even try to fight back or arm yourself.
Oh I'm sure you'll be there protecting us when those same right-wing groups come around knocking on our doors at night. Faggot.

Jason Morgan
Jason Morgan

lmao mad larper has to turn to pretending he's not mad with imageboard memetics to justify his virtue signalling

Asher Mitchell
Asher Mitchell

canada
The NDP has a demsoc faction. It wants to ban handguns too retard. Even then, socdems are center-left on the political spectrum.

Here's one of the most influential leftist publications calling for stricter laws: jakkkobinmag.com/2018/02/gun-control-parkland-students-race-police

Czech "communists" and socialists are right wing socially. They are very nationalist and oppose immigration and refugees. Milos Zeman is more of a nationalist than Trump.

mao didn't pass strict gun laws
Wrong. Even Snopes admits he did.

snopes.com/fact-check/little-gun-history/

The Security Administration Punishment Act of 1957 took the additional step of making it illegal to make, purchase, or possess firearms or ammunition without the government’s permission — though by that time at least a million “class enemies” had already died in the name of Mao Zedong’s Cultural Revolution.

There you go. The average Chinese peasant could not own guns.

Cuba also has extremely strict laws.

No matter what nation you live in right now, any individual right to bear arms is going to be supported by right wing parties. The only counterpoint you have is the Czech Republic, in which the "leftists" there are much more nationalist and socially right wing than any other leftist party in the west. Sorry man, those are just facts.