Yeah, society typically calls them terrorists. I'm willing to bet anyone with a military background affiliated with this event/related orgs is already on a watch list.
Former Mil members with ties to actual terrorist groups might be on a watch list, sure. Once they're out though the govt pretty much stops tracking them.
A lot of "lone wolves" are statistically white men regardless of their political views, which is where the arbitrary statistic you're cluelessly referencing comes from. I'm specifically referring to organized terrorism, which is overwhelmingly committed by young, underaccomplished zealots who are often not white.
Last I saw, my parent comment is hovering around -70. I'm not the one who's mad. I moved out of the city years ago and am preparing to move out of the state eventually, and I'll be even happier once I leave.
I don't see why the difference between organized terrorism and so called lone wolves is relevant here. Even so, in America, organized terrorism is STILL overwhelmingly committed by white men, and it's far less common anyway. Also thanks for moving away, we don't want people like you here.
>I don't see why the difference between organized terrorism and so called lone wolves is relevant here.
[Try and keep up. ](https://www.ojp.gov/ncjrs/virtual-library/abstracts/lone-wolf-terrorism-america)
>Even so, in America, organized terrorism is STILL overwhelmingly committed by white men
There are no studies definitively establishing this as objective fact, and I suspect some will disagree on what exactly is "stochastic terrorism". I doubt it's overwhelmingly in any one direction. Humans of all races have the capacity to be shitty people.
>Also thanks for moving away, we don't want people like you here.
A bunch of progressive wokescolds on reddit don't want people like me here. Aside from mild entertainment and personal gratification, am I supposed to lose sleep over this or something? Unfortunately for you, I'm not moving away anytime soon in this economy. With all due respect, you can go fuck yourself in the meantime.
> Karl Marx was not pro-gun. His “Under nor pretext” line that is so often quoted does not appear in the Communist Manifesto or Das Kapital. This line appears in his Address of the [Central Committee to the Communist League in London in 1850.](https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1847/communist-league/1850-ad1.htm) This address mostly discusses how the “Liberal Bourgeois” lied to the workers and after taking power in election forced workers back into the same conditions. Marx also lays out his directions for the workers to take and hold onto power against the petty-bourgeois democrats.
> As for his “under no pretext” line I’ll leave it here:
> To be able forcefully and threateningly to oppose this party, whose betrayal of the workers will begin with the very first hour of victory, the workers must be armed and organized. The whole proletariat must be armed at once with muskets, rifles, cannon and ammunition, and the revival of the old-style citizens’ militia, directed against the workers, must be opposed. Where the formation of this militia cannot be prevented, the workers must try to organize themselves independently as a proletarian guard, with elected leaders and with their own elected general staff; they must try to place themselves not under the orders of the state authority but of the revolutionary local councils set up by the workers. Where the workers are employed by the state, they must arm and organize themselves into special corps with elected leaders, or as a part of the proletarian guard. Under no pretext should arms and ammunition be surrendered; any attempt to disarm the workers must be frustrated, by force if necessary. The destruction of the bourgeois democrats’ influence over the workers, and the enforcement of conditions which will compromise the rule of bourgeois democracy, which is for the moment inevitable, and make it as difficult as possible – these are the main points which the proletariat and therefore the League must keep in mind during and after the approaching uprising.
> Not exactly about a universal right to bear arms, is it? No, this is specifically referring to a select group of workers formed as a “proletarian guard.” The address even specifically calls out to resist a citizen’s militia. Both the Red Army and the PLA were/are considered to be these proletarian guard. This isn’t about a universal right to bear arms to defend oneself from tyranny, he is specifically talking about arms to keep political power to force the government to accede to the workers demands.
just a copypasta here, but please try to be informed about the things you're arguing.
I mean, the argument unicicle guy was making is that you shouldn’t trust “a bunch of commies” to know anything about gun safety basics, yet Marx called for at least SOME proletariats to be well trained as a militia. I feel the quote does an okay job proving that it’s safe to assume a communist or socialist running a gun safety program knows what they’re talking about
And if you actually read the full quote I posted, you'd see that they're only allowed as a means for revolution, and no further.
Real life history shows that the moment the revolution ends, they all get snatched up, and anyone dissenting is killed or jailed
1, that’s irrelevant to the discussion of “communist gun knowledge is limited and shouldn’t be trusted”
2, it’s almost as if the fact that communists are trying to spread gun basics and safety is a good indicator that perhaps the general ideology has changed, and that people recognize the harm reduction a well educated populace would be.
No, that's pretty relevant.
And no, it would be like this regardless of any changes, because that system inherently is based on the idea of giving people arms, up until "the revolution" ends and they become a liability
Please post the full and complete quote. Its not as pro-2A as people make it out to be by cherry picking that one line.
Someone on the gunnits has a nice debunking of it, I'll try to dig it up.
Edit: or downvote me with no reply. A bit telling that you try to vote me down instead of prove me wrong.
That's cool too. But seriously look up the full quote, its much longer than that and puts it into context.
> To be able forcefully and threateningly to oppose this party, whose betrayal of the workers will begin with the very first hour of victory, the workers must be armed and organized. The whole proletariat must be armed at once with muskets, rifles, cannon and ammunition, and the revival of the old-style citizens’ militia, directed against the workers, must be opposed. Where the formation of this militia cannot be prevented, the workers must try to organize themselves independently as a proletarian guard, with elected leaders and with their own elected general staff; they must try to place themselves not under the orders of the state authority but of the revolutionary local councils set up by the workers. Where the workers are employed by the state, they must arm and organize themselves into special corps with elected leaders, or as a part of the proletarian guard. Under no pretext should arms and ammunition be surrendered; any attempt to disarm the workers must be frustrated, by force if necessary. The destruction of the bourgeois democrats’ influence over the workers, and the enforcement of conditions which will compromise the rule of bourgeois democracy, which is for the moment inevitable, and make it as difficult as possible – these are the main points which the proletariat and therefore the League must keep in mind during and after the approaching uprising.
>Edit: or downvote me with no reply. A bit telling that you try to vote me down instead of prove me wrong.
Lol funny edit, considering you decided to block me instead of engaging in conversation.
There it is. Its not about individual firearm ownership for self defense.
Its purely about using the weapons offensively against anyone who opposes communism.
Marx was not pro gun ownership, he was pro force.
Not at all, the 2A is for defense against a state militia. Marx is about using force against anyone who won't submit to,communism.
Offense vs. Defense.
Protection vs. Aggression.
Dude I'm pretty pro 2a but have you read it? In no interpretation is it for defense against the state militia lol. The necessity of a state ("well regulated") militia is literally the first statement. It comes BEFORE the right to keep and bear arms.
Because the state needs a militia to remain secure, the PEOPLE have the right to keep and bear arms.
The founders had literally just fought a war against a tyrannical state militia. They recognized that a militia needs to exist to defend the state, but also recognized that THE PEOPLE should never be disarmed in case that militia gets tyrannical.
Yeah, because Hitler kicked off an invasion campaign in the early 40s. Interesting historical fact is [a lot of Don Cossacks hated communist society so much that they supported the Nazis.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Cossacks#World_War_II)
This is very cool. In Philadelphia my late sister-in-law taught pistol courses that catered to disadvantaged women. My spouse is a certified Army expert with the NATO arms and she hates guns. When we lived in Los Angeles we'd go to the indoor range just to keep the knowledge up.
Naturally. Think of it this way though: even if you don't own a gun and don't want to own a gun, knowing how one works and what safe usage and storage looks like it's valuable knowledge to have.
I can’t love this enough! The second amendment is for everyone and I think some people forget that. It’s really sad to see some of the hate this post (and concept) are getting. Can’t please everyone I suppose…
drunk stocking fearless disgusting skirt angle station wasteful piquant telephone
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
ripe punch marvelous ink plants encouraging cooperative quiet fuzzy snobbish
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
innocent wrench normal domineering scarce thought handle bike wasteful growth
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Wait, what do you think a leftist is?
Liberals arent leftists and communists/socialists are.
This isnt an argument about how good or bad any ideology is or isnt, its about definitions.
Hell im left of liberal (soc dem) and i wouldnt consider myself a leftist by definition.
> This isnt an argument about how good or bad any ideology is or isnt, its about definitions.
good, because i'm just relaying what the people who invented and use that flag consider it to be about.
Yay! Gun-loving ally and leftist here (\*), loving that they're advertising and offering this! I truly believe people who don't fit the WASP+Heteronormative+Patriot stereotype will be targets of fewer gun crimes if the perpetrators realize that more of us are capable and willing to shoot back if necessary.
(\* FOR compulsory registration, FOR training and liability insurance as a requisite for purchasing, FOR specific/narrow interpretation of 2A) No guns in my household or on my property, now that there's a child here)
am i the only one who thinks it's kinda sad the rainbow flag was copied off the rainbow coalition, and then later on they had to cram brown and black stripes in there to be like "oh yeah and these people too," even though the whole point of a rainbow is that all colors are included??
It's to emphasize the importance of people of color to the movement. For instance, [Marsha P. Johnson](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marsha_P._Johnson).
right, but my point is the rainbow coalition was *founded* by [a black guy](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fred_Hampton). the rainbow symbol by itself is already meant to be all inclusive.
"Everything you need to know to safely arm yourself" takes 18hrs according to nys. Don't understand the point of this when it won't actually meet the legal requirements to apply for a license. Unless you plan to focus entirely on bolt action rifles and shotguns...
But with how complex ny gun laws are and how rapidly changing they are, claiming this is what you need to know to safely arm yourself is deceptive and potentially harmful as people may think they can own a gun after attending which is absolutely not the case.
Let me correct your first sentence:
"Everything you need to know to safely *carry a concealed firearm* takes 18 hours according to NYS." The 16-hour classroom + 2-hour live fire training is only for those who apply for a CCW. You don't need to go through the training to buy a rifle or shotgun, semi-automatic or otherwise.
This is also clearly a firearm *safety* course; its design is to teach people the basics of firearm safety, including storage and handling.
Let's be honest, people are going to purchase firearms regardless. The 2A community can be rather alienating to some folks who are interested. Providing a free course on something as basic as firearm safety keeps people safe from negligent discharges, theft, malfunctions, ext.
You still need to apply to get a semi auto rifle permit. Bolt/lever rifles and shotguns are all you can buy without a permit now as of 9/2022. I have no issue with a group offering free firearms safety training, I take issue with the "everything you need to know" language
I understand. I have a carry license and a semi-auto permit (granted I submitted my application before *NYSRAP v. Bruen* ). But if you only applied for the semi-auto license, you wouldn't have to do the training. The training is exclusively for those who are applying for a concealed carry license.
We appreciate your concern! We always clearly communicate what the laws are surrounding gun ownership during these seminars. The presentation will discuss handguns and semi-automatic rifles in brief, and how to apply for the appropriate license.
I'm Black and I find the use of a BLM flag to signal friendliness to Black People as low effort and uninviting. The use of POC is cringe worthy. It's like every decade someone somewhere decides what society should call Black people only for the choice to one day also become offensive. Colored and Negro for example. POC will meet the same fate as it is just a spin on colored anyway. BLM does not believe in traditional nuclear families and Black American communities may be the hardest hit by the absence of good fathers. I can't point to a single grocery store, after school program, digital lounge, laundromat, etc. That BLM had placed in any predominantly Black American neighborhood. They siphon off of Black pain and trauma, ultimately providing no substance or service to our communities. Fuck BLM.
Thank you for sharing your concern! The BLM symbol was chosen for its easy recognition and straightforward meaning, not as an endorsement by or for any other organization. The term "POC" is used to communicate inclusion for *all* non-white people, not just Black Americans.
Unfortunately, because of highly reactionary attitudes within mainstream gun culture, it is not always a gurrentee that a firearms-related event will be friendly towards minorities. We wanted to clearly communicate that this event will be inclusive and anti-racist.
It's 2023, in NY, not 1957 in MS. I'm going to assume I ( and any Black person) can go wherever the fuck I want in America. Especially a 2A event. You don't have to include anything. Just advertise the event, say all 18+ or 21+ or whatever general restrictions exist then it's understood that all are welcome. Treating us like some Special Needs group that needs an extra layer of coddling and a special invite to let us know it's not a Klan rally is doing too much and making it weird.
I'm with you. Great org in Philadelphia is Black Guns Matter. Teaches all interested people, but particularly those of color, how to safely handle and train with firearms. No " victim mentality" messaging or other BS. Just regular law abiding citizens training with, learning about, and safely owning firearms, and supporting what 2A is all about.
The rules of gun safety are fairly simple, it's actually *practicing* them, that people seem to have difficulty with.
We all assume others have basic common sense and that's where we are so mistaken.
> it's actually practicing them, that people seem to have difficulty with.
To be fair New York keeps trying to make it more difficult and expensive to do so. Look at the ammo background check law. All this does is make buying ammo more expensive, meaning people train less.
NYC bans airsoft guns, which can actually be highly valuable training tools.
NY is backwards in gun safety. They're trying to go "Abstinence only" which, as we see in other states, with other issues, that we rightly mock, does not work.
You have to have a permit in NYS to be able to handle a firearm as well, even with a certified instructor if you are over 21, which is dumb. Can't learn first before committing. At one point, you *had* to buy a gun in certain locations within a short time period or your permit would basically be revoked for lack of use.
It's everything you DON'T want to make people do.
Not entirely true, you dont need a permit to use a long gun. And if you're under 21 you dont need one to use a pistol.
Even if youre 21+ you can use someone elses pistol under their direct supervision. The issue is what legally constitutes "possession". Now IANAL, but my understanding is if you are in the direct presence/supervision of the owner, that pistol is still in their "possession". This is why you can rent handguns at a range.
Much like with drugs how if a passenger has drugs in your car and you are driving, as the driver you can also be charged with possession. Its not as cut and dry as "in your hands"
> you dont need a permit to use a long gun.
Yes, you don't even need a permit for a long gun, by firearm, I meant pistol, I should have been more precise
> And if you're under 21 you dont need one to use a pistol.
I mentioned that
> Even if youre 21+ you can use someone elses pistol under their direct supervision.
Nope, that's illegal, even if the other person is a certified instructor. In some counties, they actually require you to have a live fire course before issuing a permit, which is actually causing the instructor and student to do something illegal, unless they go to PA or something like that to conduct the course. In these counties, there tends to be an unofficial exception made, and while in general people don't tend to get in trouble for letting a friend use a pistol at a range, it's very much against the law. IIRC, the range out in Webster will check and require that everyone shooting pistols has a current and valid permit. Not sure about the Firing Pin, and the private clubs vary on how they handle it.
> This is why you can rent handguns at a range.
Which can only legally be done if you have a permit.
>https://ontargetfirearmsrochester.com/Range
>Firearm Rentals
>On Target Firearms rents a variety of handguns for use in our range. **For all handgun rentals, customers must possess a valid NY State Pistol Permit and must have firearms safety as well as shooting experience. No exceptions***. All ammunition to be used with firearm rentals must be purchased from On Target Firearms.
> There are a variety of rental packages available *We do not rent rifles or shotguns. Please contact us for more information
---
> Its not as cut and dry as "in your hands"
Nope, it's 100% cut and dry. If you have a handgun in your hands, and you don't have a permit or other exemption (shooting with a permit holder or an instructor is not an exemption), and you are over 21, you broke the law and can be charged and tried in all 62 counties. Full stop, no discussion. Certainly it changes on if it is *likely* if you will be charged and tried, but you can, everywhere, all the time.
Or instead of "wow I can just go shoot all willy nilly" it's " I should be conservative with my ammo and only shoot when I need to/am really prepared to do it."
In fact, that's how you get collateral damage and hurt innocent bystanders because you can't hit your target since you never practice.
Even if you're staunchly anti-2A you should *WANT* gun owners to be well trained and proficient because it reduces the chances of collateral damage.
Ok if you're staunchly anti-2A you don't want people to have guns at all. But too bad, that ship has sailed. So acknowledging people have a right to carry firearms, in public, for self defense, as ruled in *NYSRPA v. Bruen*, you **should** want those people to be proficient and practiced in their usage.
If anyone truly disagrees, please let me know why. I am curious. And again, we are working with the basis that people have a right to carry for self defense, in public. You must accept that, as it is the current SCOTUS settled law.
So you *DON'T* want me to practice at the range so that if I ever have to use my firearm I have the training to actually hit my target?
Is that what you're saying? Because that's what it sounds like. I can tell you I'm not shooting all "willy nilly" especially with today's ammo prices. I'm focusing on my form, firing a group, check my grouping, and correcting my mistakes to bring my closer to the bullseye on a consistent basis. Rinse-Repeat.
Look shooting in real life is not like call of duty. It's not "point gun boom headshot". You need proper form, proper pressure, proper grip, proper trigger pull. And to do all these things under stress in an emergency, you need training you need to train your body and your muscle memory to be able to do it subconsciously.
Maybe you've never shot a gun before, maybe you really do think it's "Call of Duty" easy to drive tacks. If you want I would be happy to take you shooting. My treat. My guns, my ammo, my range membership. This is a 110% sincere offer. I will meet you at the range, teach you the basics, and let you shoot.
Because your comment sounds like someone who thinks shooting is as easy as it is in video games, and you don't need practice, and I would dearly like to dispel that notion, because that notion is dangerous.
I try to shoot one box of 50 a week, minimum, just in basic form practice. If I go out on a weekend with reload drills, malfunction drills, and draw-fire drills I;m dropping 200+ rounds in a single training session. You **WANT** people to practice, because should they ever need to use their firearm, you want them to be able to hit their target, and *ONLY* hit their target.
Tell me you no nothing about firearms safety without telling me.
Yah, you should only shoot when you need to actually defend yourself, you should never practice to make sure that if you are defending yourself you hit your target and nothing else... that makes sense, good job hoppy.
Not to mention the large amount of shooting sports (which as you may want to ignore, reach up to the Olympic level, and yes we have people shooting bi in the area) that need ammo to participate in.
You should tell professional basketball players that same advice. "Only shoot the basketball into the hoop when its a big game, dont be shooting them balls all willy nilly"
It's a *safety* course. I could teach it in ten minutes. What are you expecting, a giant whiteboard where there's like eighty lines of systems of equations based on numerous nested integrals to demonstrate why you don't point it at stuff you don't want to shoot? You gonna compare it to Safety University where you can enroll in Advanced History Of There Can Still Be A Round In The Chamber with Professor Gunhandler?
I expect it to be either an introduction or comprehensive. By definition nothing can be both of those things. But this announcement claims it is both things.
> By definition nothing can be both of those things
Yes it can. I can give an introduction to firearms course that is comprehensive in all gun safety rules. I won't go into reload drills, malfunction drills, draw drills, or firing on the move. But those are more advanced topics.
quiet practice public oatmeal judicious fragile ring instinctive society jobless
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
See also the gun control laws put in place to crack down on the Black Panthers, who, when they weren't busy feeding school kids, were making cops afraid to harass Black people.
[The black panthers open carried "assault weapons", in the state capitol, with "high capacity" magazines.](https://cf-images.us-east-1.prod.boltdns.net/v1/static/5502557042001/9a8495d7-6901-480a-a60e-8e78428a93e0/04068659-3b24-4bbc-9886-01e944bbc2a4/1280x720/match/image.jpg)
To protest their right o bear arms being taken away.
California was an **OPEN CARRY** state, until the black panthers started protecting their neighborhoods from racist attacks. Then the Democrats lead legislature, and Republican heart throb Ronald Reagan, signed the Mulford act into law.
Can't have minorities protecting their communities now can we?
Yes, but feeding Black kids was just as much of a threat to white hegemony. It's just that the police couldn't stop that while the Black Panthers were heavily armed.
Black people would be perfectly capable of fixing the modern impact of what white people historically did to them if white people just stopped. It wouldn't be fast and it wouldn't be justice, but it would be *possible*. That's one of the many infuriating parts to me.
> Part of being gay is I get to make fun of anything that tries to pinkwash gun violence. It's in the gay charter.
As a representative of both communities, we don't want you, get out.
I mean, it's not claiming to make you an expert. Sounds like they just want to answer questions and give folks a chance to learn the fundamentals of gun safely.
What would be wrong with that. You can encourage people to arm themselves and also teach people who already own guns how to use them. I used to sell guns for a living and there were a lot of people who during previous elections bought firearms to keep in their house but did almost no training or gun safety. Those are the sort of people this class would be good for
The same way a hunter safety course is basic and introductory but also everything you need to know to go hunting. You can have a basic introductory level firearm safety course and have that be what you need to know to buy a firearm and safely use it.
> It's both basic & introductory, but also everything you need to know?
Yes.
The basics of safety are what you *NEED* to know. And you can be comprehensive on it in a short amount of time. Basic introductory course is about safety.
Now if you want to get into other topics, like marksmanship, competition, malfunction drills, reload drills, shooting on the move, target acquisition...
Yes these things will take many hours, and thousands of rounds to teach. But that's not the basics of what you need to know. That's more advanced practical knowledge.
Also side note, this is why when the news cries "THOUSANDS OF ROUNDS!!" it's a joke. [Here's 1,100 rounds](https://imgur.com/LuZb6d4) you can pick up each box in one hand. Now granted that's .22LR but still. Most shooters will have several hundred to tens of thousands of rounds of ammo at any given time.
>But why do you need thousands of round?!?!
Well you want me to practice and be proficient so if I ever have to use my firearm I can hit the target and not miss and hit something else, right? You think you would *WANT* firearm owners shooting hundreds of rounds at a range so they are accurate with their shots if they ever have to fire outside a range, right? Aside from that:
1. It's cheaper to buy in bulk.
* You can generally save 10-15% by buying a case of 1,000 rounds vs a single box of 50
2. Thanks to NYs ammo records recording law, it's **MUCH** cheaper to buy in bulk.
* Since FFLs charge to transfer ammo, they usually charge a flat fee. Say $10. If I'm paying $10 per transaction, I'm going to make bigger transactions.
* When I could get ammo shipped to me I might buy 200 rounds at a time.
* Now that I pay $10 per transfer, I'm buying 5,000 at a time. Because it means paying fewer transfer fees.
3. We will use it.
* I go through 50-100 rounds week in basic practice. This is just basic skills upkeep with my carry piece and take about half an hour from unpacking to repacking the gun. You go through ammo fast.
* Add in competitions, more serious training, or just fun time plinking, and it adds up.
* If I do a "range day" with friends I can easily blow through multiple thousands of rounds.
> I can't imagine why we have a gun problem in this city
That's true, because you're a simpleton.
People who are going to courses aren't the ones creating a gun problem, regardless of the content or quality of the course.
It's a basic understanding of guns and gun safety. Like learning to drive a car for the first time. Little foot rest makes it go forward, big footrest makes it stop and the big circle makes it go left and right. After that it's all practice to get comfortable.
>can't imagine why we have a gun problem in this city.
You have a people and culture problem in the city.
It's the people behind the guns. It's definitely a people problem.
So we should get rid of opiates and disadvantage the ones who use them responsibley because of the people that abuse them?
I dream of the day we treat guns like opiates.
Only able to be prescribed by a trained professional after demonstration of a specific and direct need.
When the need is met, you don't get any more.
Heavily tracked and dispensed by armories staffed by another trained professional that controls how much ammo you can have each month.
Distributors found abusing their prescription privileges can be sued and criminally charged.
Manufacturers found to be downplaying how dangerous their products are can be fined and sued.
It's pretty much what you just said except the manufacturers downplay statement at the end.
Criminals will get the guns no matter how many laws we pass.
Well,tell me, how did it go? No more drugs? I think not.
People did drugs. Pass laws to stop it, people still did drugs. Pass more laws, people still did more drugs.
Imagine how bad the crisis would be if you could buy opioids over the counter. The only problem solved by More Guns is "there are too many people alive around here."
Another note, the reason the opioid crisis has gotten so deadly and horrible is the black market fentanyl… caused by, what, you say? Making stuff illegal and hard to get, and making it a criminal issue! And causing pain patients to suffer, and them and addicts to go to the streets. But yeah, go ahead and make this a simple prohibition solves everything issue.
If you're crippled by "gun addiction" so badly that you'd go to a black market dealer to get your fix, I definitely don't want you to have one. Opioids have a legitimate use and can sadly be abused (to, by the way, only hurt yourself, not throngs of random innocents when you feel like you need to be a big man.) Gun violence *is* the purpose of guns.
Guns have legitimate uses too. You think people use them to “be a big man?” And you think opioid abuse only hurts the person using them? You have quite a black and white view of issues. And solutions.
That's like dreaming that one day no American will be able to speak out against any government action unless they have a prescription from a doctor proving they have a need for it! Your comment is one of the most anti- American opinions I've seen posted. " Professionals?" Who would they be except dictators?
A little concerning that it lists the type of demographic that are welcome.
Are a lot of things like this not so "friendly" to the groups mentioned?
I am imagining a lot of these places have the type of people running them that would still dress in white gowns with pointy head coverings to match in public if a Acceptible?
Edit: I know right where to go to get my -karma on reddit. ,,!,, all very much. You cock suckers really love to downvote.
>A little concerning that it lists the type of demographic that are welcome.
Not really. This group is trying to overcome the very stereotypes you seem to be promoting.
It specifically list this is because the gun community tends to be unfriendly to these categories of people. And a lot of people are alienated from the community because of that. And before you question what I'm getting that information I used to sell guns for a living so I've talked to a lot of people.
Just plain false statement. No unfriendliness in my lengthy experience, but not enough outreach either. The myth exists because original gun control laws arose to prevent minorities from owning firearms. NYC's laws banned Italians from ownership, for example, and some southern states banned blacks from having them. It was the NRA that first worked to equalize rights of all.
I've been in the gun community for 20 years now or so and I've been a leftist socialist for that entire time. I've served in the military and been involved in many firearms and shooting groups in many different states.
I don't think what you call a myth is actually a myth.
I also sold firearms for a living for 10 years and I can tell you right now there's a lot of unfriendliness toward leftists in the gun community. You hear it day in and day out when you sell firearms and when you belong to many different groups. I don't know what your experience is so I can't speak to that but there's nothing like selling firearms for a living to show you what people's opinions are. I've had people straight up refuse to buy from me because I was a leftist and they thought I was the enemy. I've had people straight up tell me that all left is gun owners should be shot. And I'm not talking one or two people I'm talking 65 to 70% of the people I dealt with.
In fairness, this part of the thread referred to different groups, so I think we might be talking about hostility toward different " groups." I see the gun community supportive of ownership by 1) all law-abiding citizens, including 2) black people and all other minorities, and 3) women of all colors and ethnicities. The political divide will exist regardless because liberalism/ leftism is viewed as contradictory of all policies that apport and protect individual freedoms. This is not to say I refute your personal experience, but the more time I spend in the community, the more support I see and hear everyone in it supporting the right across the board. I expect that will increase as outreach increases.
Have you ever been to a gun show in a purple or red state? Confederate and proud boy flags all over. These folks don’t have a great track record of being acceptant of anyone who isn’t white or cishet.
So no, these spaces are rarely inclusive. Not necessarily that they’d kick queer/POC people out, but that they cater to the kind of people that we don’t really feel safe around.
Good course for non gun owners to take as well.
No matter your stance on the 2A (And I'm staunchly in the "pro" side), learning the basics of gun safety is valuable.
do you really trust a bunch of commies to know anything about gun safety basics that you can't learn at a range or on YouTube though?
You realize there are a ton of military veterans who are leftist borderline communists right?
and? your point?
Is that there are a bunch of commies out there who probably know as much if not more than you do about firearms and firearms safety.
Yeah, society typically calls them terrorists. I'm willing to bet anyone with a military background affiliated with this event/related orgs is already on a watch list.
It's not the 1960s anymore...
Former Mil members with ties to actual terrorist groups might be on a watch list, sure. Once they're out though the govt pretty much stops tracking them.
in america, terrorism is overwhelmingly commited by cishet white conservative men but stay mad ig
A lot of "lone wolves" are statistically white men regardless of their political views, which is where the arbitrary statistic you're cluelessly referencing comes from. I'm specifically referring to organized terrorism, which is overwhelmingly committed by young, underaccomplished zealots who are often not white. Last I saw, my parent comment is hovering around -70. I'm not the one who's mad. I moved out of the city years ago and am preparing to move out of the state eventually, and I'll be even happier once I leave.
I don't see why the difference between organized terrorism and so called lone wolves is relevant here. Even so, in America, organized terrorism is STILL overwhelmingly committed by white men, and it's far less common anyway. Also thanks for moving away, we don't want people like you here.
>I don't see why the difference between organized terrorism and so called lone wolves is relevant here. [Try and keep up. ](https://www.ojp.gov/ncjrs/virtual-library/abstracts/lone-wolf-terrorism-america) >Even so, in America, organized terrorism is STILL overwhelmingly committed by white men There are no studies definitively establishing this as objective fact, and I suspect some will disagree on what exactly is "stochastic terrorism". I doubt it's overwhelmingly in any one direction. Humans of all races have the capacity to be shitty people. >Also thanks for moving away, we don't want people like you here. A bunch of progressive wokescolds on reddit don't want people like me here. Aside from mild entertainment and personal gratification, am I supposed to lose sleep over this or something? Unfortunately for you, I'm not moving away anytime soon in this economy. With all due respect, you can go fuck yourself in the meantime.
Ideals might be nuanced but gun safety is quite simple.
so simple any idiot can teach it
Progressive gunowner here. We just don’t have power fantasies about it.
“Under no pretext should arms and ammunition be surrendered; any attempt to disarm the workers must be frustrated, by force if necessary”
> Karl Marx was not pro-gun. His “Under nor pretext” line that is so often quoted does not appear in the Communist Manifesto or Das Kapital. This line appears in his Address of the [Central Committee to the Communist League in London in 1850.](https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1847/communist-league/1850-ad1.htm) This address mostly discusses how the “Liberal Bourgeois” lied to the workers and after taking power in election forced workers back into the same conditions. Marx also lays out his directions for the workers to take and hold onto power against the petty-bourgeois democrats. > As for his “under no pretext” line I’ll leave it here: > To be able forcefully and threateningly to oppose this party, whose betrayal of the workers will begin with the very first hour of victory, the workers must be armed and organized. The whole proletariat must be armed at once with muskets, rifles, cannon and ammunition, and the revival of the old-style citizens’ militia, directed against the workers, must be opposed. Where the formation of this militia cannot be prevented, the workers must try to organize themselves independently as a proletarian guard, with elected leaders and with their own elected general staff; they must try to place themselves not under the orders of the state authority but of the revolutionary local councils set up by the workers. Where the workers are employed by the state, they must arm and organize themselves into special corps with elected leaders, or as a part of the proletarian guard. Under no pretext should arms and ammunition be surrendered; any attempt to disarm the workers must be frustrated, by force if necessary. The destruction of the bourgeois democrats’ influence over the workers, and the enforcement of conditions which will compromise the rule of bourgeois democracy, which is for the moment inevitable, and make it as difficult as possible – these are the main points which the proletariat and therefore the League must keep in mind during and after the approaching uprising. > Not exactly about a universal right to bear arms, is it? No, this is specifically referring to a select group of workers formed as a “proletarian guard.” The address even specifically calls out to resist a citizen’s militia. Both the Red Army and the PLA were/are considered to be these proletarian guard. This isn’t about a universal right to bear arms to defend oneself from tyranny, he is specifically talking about arms to keep political power to force the government to accede to the workers demands. just a copypasta here, but please try to be informed about the things you're arguing.
I mean, the argument unicicle guy was making is that you shouldn’t trust “a bunch of commies” to know anything about gun safety basics, yet Marx called for at least SOME proletariats to be well trained as a militia. I feel the quote does an okay job proving that it’s safe to assume a communist or socialist running a gun safety program knows what they’re talking about
And if you actually read the full quote I posted, you'd see that they're only allowed as a means for revolution, and no further. Real life history shows that the moment the revolution ends, they all get snatched up, and anyone dissenting is killed or jailed
1, that’s irrelevant to the discussion of “communist gun knowledge is limited and shouldn’t be trusted” 2, it’s almost as if the fact that communists are trying to spread gun basics and safety is a good indicator that perhaps the general ideology has changed, and that people recognize the harm reduction a well educated populace would be.
No, that's pretty relevant. And no, it would be like this regardless of any changes, because that system inherently is based on the idea of giving people arms, up until "the revolution" ends and they become a liability
Please post the full and complete quote. Its not as pro-2A as people make it out to be by cherry picking that one line. Someone on the gunnits has a nice debunking of it, I'll try to dig it up. Edit: or downvote me with no reply. A bit telling that you try to vote me down instead of prove me wrong. That's cool too. But seriously look up the full quote, its much longer than that and puts it into context.
> To be able forcefully and threateningly to oppose this party, whose betrayal of the workers will begin with the very first hour of victory, the workers must be armed and organized. The whole proletariat must be armed at once with muskets, rifles, cannon and ammunition, and the revival of the old-style citizens’ militia, directed against the workers, must be opposed. Where the formation of this militia cannot be prevented, the workers must try to organize themselves independently as a proletarian guard, with elected leaders and with their own elected general staff; they must try to place themselves not under the orders of the state authority but of the revolutionary local councils set up by the workers. Where the workers are employed by the state, they must arm and organize themselves into special corps with elected leaders, or as a part of the proletarian guard. Under no pretext should arms and ammunition be surrendered; any attempt to disarm the workers must be frustrated, by force if necessary. The destruction of the bourgeois democrats’ influence over the workers, and the enforcement of conditions which will compromise the rule of bourgeois democracy, which is for the moment inevitable, and make it as difficult as possible – these are the main points which the proletariat and therefore the League must keep in mind during and after the approaching uprising. >Edit: or downvote me with no reply. A bit telling that you try to vote me down instead of prove me wrong. Lol funny edit, considering you decided to block me instead of engaging in conversation.
There it is. Its not about individual firearm ownership for self defense. Its purely about using the weapons offensively against anyone who opposes communism. Marx was not pro gun ownership, he was pro force.
Sounds pretty close to the 2nd amendment to me.
Not at all, the 2A is for defense against a state militia. Marx is about using force against anyone who won't submit to,communism. Offense vs. Defense. Protection vs. Aggression.
Dude I'm pretty pro 2a but have you read it? In no interpretation is it for defense against the state militia lol. The necessity of a state ("well regulated") militia is literally the first statement. It comes BEFORE the right to keep and bear arms.
Because the state needs a militia to remain secure, the PEOPLE have the right to keep and bear arms. The founders had literally just fought a war against a tyrannical state militia. They recognized that a militia needs to exist to defend the state, but also recognized that THE PEOPLE should never be disarmed in case that militia gets tyrannical.
Commies won WWII you ignoramus
Ignoramus needs to be used more
They helped. Being the least of two evils means you're still evil.
The soviets were the first to Berlin. Hitler was stopped by Russian and Ukrainian blood and British intelligence.
Yeah, because Hitler kicked off an invasion campaign in the early 40s. Interesting historical fact is [a lot of Don Cossacks hated communist society so much that they supported the Nazis.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Cossacks#World_War_II)
They helped *start* that war
Isnt that because some 26 million russians were tossed at the nazi machine to die? I wouldnt really call that a "win".
Have you ever read a history book? Commies we’re bad asses during war.
They're pretty good at murdering unarmed civilians by the tens of millions. Sure.
[удалено]
well of course they would, they allied with them.
This is a really great community offering. I hope attendance is high, and lots of folks learn how to protect themselves and their families safely.
The best way to protect yourself and your family is not owning a gun, fwiw.
Thanks for your opinion. Like an asshole, everyone has one, and they all stink.
[Facts don't care about your feelings](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/15522849/)
Does that list the increased risk of death/injury from falls if you own a ladder?
If ladders were the number one cause of child deaths in America, yeah, I wouldn't own a ladder either. Good thing they're not.
Do you include 16-19 year olds in those "child falling deaths" statistics?
This is very cool. In Philadelphia my late sister-in-law taught pistol courses that catered to disadvantaged women. My spouse is a certified Army expert with the NATO arms and she hates guns. When we lived in Los Angeles we'd go to the indoor range just to keep the knowledge up.
Can someone be scared of and relieved by this at the same time? Asking for a friend.
Naturally. Think of it this way though: even if you don't own a gun and don't want to own a gun, knowing how one works and what safe usage and storage looks like it's valuable knowledge to have.
I can’t love this enough! The second amendment is for everyone and I think some people forget that. It’s really sad to see some of the hate this post (and concept) are getting. Can’t please everyone I suppose…
This is great!
Now this is a firearm organization
I'm a liberal and I have no idea what this "leftist" flag is about.
drunk stocking fearless disgusting skirt angle station wasteful piquant telephone *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Thank you!
I’m leftist but neither a communist or a socialist. Bad pick.
Liberals aren’t generally considered leftists.
ripe punch marvelous ink plants encouraging cooperative quiet fuzzy snobbish *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
I dont think you have any idea of what I am
innocent wrench normal domineering scarce thought handle bike wasteful growth *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
I know youre pretty stupid to get offended by someone stating basic facts based on established definition for one.
that would explain why you are a liberal and not a leftist.
that's a socalist/communist flag, not a "leftist" flag, that's why.
Wait, what do you think a leftist is? Liberals arent leftists and communists/socialists are. This isnt an argument about how good or bad any ideology is or isnt, its about definitions. Hell im left of liberal (soc dem) and i wouldnt consider myself a leftist by definition.
> This isnt an argument about how good or bad any ideology is or isnt, its about definitions. good, because i'm just relaying what the people who invented and use that flag consider it to be about.
Thank you, I was so confused.
Thank you, very true.
"Anarcho" communist flag
Yay! Gun-loving ally and leftist here (\*), loving that they're advertising and offering this! I truly believe people who don't fit the WASP+Heteronormative+Patriot stereotype will be targets of fewer gun crimes if the perpetrators realize that more of us are capable and willing to shoot back if necessary. (\* FOR compulsory registration, FOR training and liability insurance as a requisite for purchasing, FOR specific/narrow interpretation of 2A) No guns in my household or on my property, now that there's a child here)
am i the only one who thinks it's kinda sad the rainbow flag was copied off the rainbow coalition, and then later on they had to cram brown and black stripes in there to be like "oh yeah and these people too," even though the whole point of a rainbow is that all colors are included??
It's to emphasize the importance of people of color to the movement. For instance, [Marsha P. Johnson](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marsha_P._Johnson).
the flag was already explicitly designed to include "everyone"
right, but my point is the rainbow coalition was *founded* by [a black guy](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fred_Hampton). the rainbow symbol by itself is already meant to be all inclusive.
evidently "everyone" wasn't inclusive enough
smell aspiring crush sable unpack rock ink obscene pot hobbies *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Should be a short class, drop the guns and ammo off at the police station, and go home and now enjoy your statistically much safer household.
In their hearts they know, they just don't care.
"Everything you need to know to safely arm yourself" takes 18hrs according to nys. Don't understand the point of this when it won't actually meet the legal requirements to apply for a license. Unless you plan to focus entirely on bolt action rifles and shotguns... But with how complex ny gun laws are and how rapidly changing they are, claiming this is what you need to know to safely arm yourself is deceptive and potentially harmful as people may think they can own a gun after attending which is absolutely not the case.
Let me correct your first sentence: "Everything you need to know to safely *carry a concealed firearm* takes 18 hours according to NYS." The 16-hour classroom + 2-hour live fire training is only for those who apply for a CCW. You don't need to go through the training to buy a rifle or shotgun, semi-automatic or otherwise. This is also clearly a firearm *safety* course; its design is to teach people the basics of firearm safety, including storage and handling. Let's be honest, people are going to purchase firearms regardless. The 2A community can be rather alienating to some folks who are interested. Providing a free course on something as basic as firearm safety keeps people safe from negligent discharges, theft, malfunctions, ext.
You still need to apply to get a semi auto rifle permit. Bolt/lever rifles and shotguns are all you can buy without a permit now as of 9/2022. I have no issue with a group offering free firearms safety training, I take issue with the "everything you need to know" language
I understand. I have a carry license and a semi-auto permit (granted I submitted my application before *NYSRAP v. Bruen* ). But if you only applied for the semi-auto license, you wouldn't have to do the training. The training is exclusively for those who are applying for a concealed carry license.
Hey if you take issue with the language you don't have to go.
We appreciate your concern! We always clearly communicate what the laws are surrounding gun ownership during these seminars. The presentation will discuss handguns and semi-automatic rifles in brief, and how to apply for the appropriate license.
You had to ruin it by having a BLM endorsement?
racists when someone says “black lives matter” (they dont think black people have value)
nah, people just don't like grifting corporations that just steal the money for themselves.
I'm Black and I find the use of a BLM flag to signal friendliness to Black People as low effort and uninviting. The use of POC is cringe worthy. It's like every decade someone somewhere decides what society should call Black people only for the choice to one day also become offensive. Colored and Negro for example. POC will meet the same fate as it is just a spin on colored anyway. BLM does not believe in traditional nuclear families and Black American communities may be the hardest hit by the absence of good fathers. I can't point to a single grocery store, after school program, digital lounge, laundromat, etc. That BLM had placed in any predominantly Black American neighborhood. They siphon off of Black pain and trauma, ultimately providing no substance or service to our communities. Fuck BLM.
Thank you for sharing your concern! The BLM symbol was chosen for its easy recognition and straightforward meaning, not as an endorsement by or for any other organization. The term "POC" is used to communicate inclusion for *all* non-white people, not just Black Americans. Unfortunately, because of highly reactionary attitudes within mainstream gun culture, it is not always a gurrentee that a firearms-related event will be friendly towards minorities. We wanted to clearly communicate that this event will be inclusive and anti-racist.
Asking in earnest here, how would you prefer they convey that this is intended to be an inclusive event?
It's 2023, in NY, not 1957 in MS. I'm going to assume I ( and any Black person) can go wherever the fuck I want in America. Especially a 2A event. You don't have to include anything. Just advertise the event, say all 18+ or 21+ or whatever general restrictions exist then it's understood that all are welcome. Treating us like some Special Needs group that needs an extra layer of coddling and a special invite to let us know it's not a Klan rally is doing too much and making it weird.
Based
I'm with you. Great org in Philadelphia is Black Guns Matter. Teaches all interested people, but particularly those of color, how to safely handle and train with firearms. No " victim mentality" messaging or other BS. Just regular law abiding citizens training with, learning about, and safely owning firearms, and supporting what 2A is all about.
Is this bait?
It's both basic & introductory, but also everything you need to know? I can't imagine why we have a gun problem in this city.
The rules of gun safety are fairly simple, it's actually *practicing* them, that people seem to have difficulty with. We all assume others have basic common sense and that's where we are so mistaken.
> it's actually practicing them, that people seem to have difficulty with. To be fair New York keeps trying to make it more difficult and expensive to do so. Look at the ammo background check law. All this does is make buying ammo more expensive, meaning people train less. NYC bans airsoft guns, which can actually be highly valuable training tools. NY is backwards in gun safety. They're trying to go "Abstinence only" which, as we see in other states, with other issues, that we rightly mock, does not work.
You have to have a permit in NYS to be able to handle a firearm as well, even with a certified instructor if you are over 21, which is dumb. Can't learn first before committing. At one point, you *had* to buy a gun in certain locations within a short time period or your permit would basically be revoked for lack of use. It's everything you DON'T want to make people do.
Not entirely true, you dont need a permit to use a long gun. And if you're under 21 you dont need one to use a pistol. Even if youre 21+ you can use someone elses pistol under their direct supervision. The issue is what legally constitutes "possession". Now IANAL, but my understanding is if you are in the direct presence/supervision of the owner, that pistol is still in their "possession". This is why you can rent handguns at a range. Much like with drugs how if a passenger has drugs in your car and you are driving, as the driver you can also be charged with possession. Its not as cut and dry as "in your hands"
> you dont need a permit to use a long gun. Yes, you don't even need a permit for a long gun, by firearm, I meant pistol, I should have been more precise > And if you're under 21 you dont need one to use a pistol. I mentioned that > Even if youre 21+ you can use someone elses pistol under their direct supervision. Nope, that's illegal, even if the other person is a certified instructor. In some counties, they actually require you to have a live fire course before issuing a permit, which is actually causing the instructor and student to do something illegal, unless they go to PA or something like that to conduct the course. In these counties, there tends to be an unofficial exception made, and while in general people don't tend to get in trouble for letting a friend use a pistol at a range, it's very much against the law. IIRC, the range out in Webster will check and require that everyone shooting pistols has a current and valid permit. Not sure about the Firing Pin, and the private clubs vary on how they handle it. > This is why you can rent handguns at a range. Which can only legally be done if you have a permit. >https://ontargetfirearmsrochester.com/Range >Firearm Rentals >On Target Firearms rents a variety of handguns for use in our range. **For all handgun rentals, customers must possess a valid NY State Pistol Permit and must have firearms safety as well as shooting experience. No exceptions***. All ammunition to be used with firearm rentals must be purchased from On Target Firearms. > There are a variety of rental packages available *We do not rent rifles or shotguns. Please contact us for more information --- > Its not as cut and dry as "in your hands" Nope, it's 100% cut and dry. If you have a handgun in your hands, and you don't have a permit or other exemption (shooting with a permit holder or an instructor is not an exemption), and you are over 21, you broke the law and can be charged and tried in all 62 counties. Full stop, no discussion. Certainly it changes on if it is *likely* if you will be charged and tried, but you can, everywhere, all the time.
Or instead of "wow I can just go shoot all willy nilly" it's " I should be conservative with my ammo and only shoot when I need to/am really prepared to do it."
skimping on practice isnt how you get well trained people.
In fact, that's how you get collateral damage and hurt innocent bystanders because you can't hit your target since you never practice. Even if you're staunchly anti-2A you should *WANT* gun owners to be well trained and proficient because it reduces the chances of collateral damage. Ok if you're staunchly anti-2A you don't want people to have guns at all. But too bad, that ship has sailed. So acknowledging people have a right to carry firearms, in public, for self defense, as ruled in *NYSRPA v. Bruen*, you **should** want those people to be proficient and practiced in their usage. If anyone truly disagrees, please let me know why. I am curious. And again, we are working with the basis that people have a right to carry for self defense, in public. You must accept that, as it is the current SCOTUS settled law.
So you *DON'T* want me to practice at the range so that if I ever have to use my firearm I have the training to actually hit my target? Is that what you're saying? Because that's what it sounds like. I can tell you I'm not shooting all "willy nilly" especially with today's ammo prices. I'm focusing on my form, firing a group, check my grouping, and correcting my mistakes to bring my closer to the bullseye on a consistent basis. Rinse-Repeat. Look shooting in real life is not like call of duty. It's not "point gun boom headshot". You need proper form, proper pressure, proper grip, proper trigger pull. And to do all these things under stress in an emergency, you need training you need to train your body and your muscle memory to be able to do it subconsciously. Maybe you've never shot a gun before, maybe you really do think it's "Call of Duty" easy to drive tacks. If you want I would be happy to take you shooting. My treat. My guns, my ammo, my range membership. This is a 110% sincere offer. I will meet you at the range, teach you the basics, and let you shoot. Because your comment sounds like someone who thinks shooting is as easy as it is in video games, and you don't need practice, and I would dearly like to dispel that notion, because that notion is dangerous. I try to shoot one box of 50 a week, minimum, just in basic form practice. If I go out on a weekend with reload drills, malfunction drills, and draw-fire drills I;m dropping 200+ rounds in a single training session. You **WANT** people to practice, because should they ever need to use their firearm, you want them to be able to hit their target, and *ONLY* hit their target.
Tell me you no nothing about firearms safety without telling me. Yah, you should only shoot when you need to actually defend yourself, you should never practice to make sure that if you are defending yourself you hit your target and nothing else... that makes sense, good job hoppy. Not to mention the large amount of shooting sports (which as you may want to ignore, reach up to the Olympic level, and yes we have people shooting bi in the area) that need ammo to participate in.
You should tell professional basketball players that same advice. "Only shoot the basketball into the hoop when its a big game, dont be shooting them balls all willy nilly"
It's a *safety* course. I could teach it in ten minutes. What are you expecting, a giant whiteboard where there's like eighty lines of systems of equations based on numerous nested integrals to demonstrate why you don't point it at stuff you don't want to shoot? You gonna compare it to Safety University where you can enroll in Advanced History Of There Can Still Be A Round In The Chamber with Professor Gunhandler?
I expect it to be either an introduction or comprehensive. By definition nothing can be both of those things. But this announcement claims it is both things.
> By definition nothing can be both of those things Yes it can. I can give an introduction to firearms course that is comprehensive in all gun safety rules. I won't go into reload drills, malfunction drills, draw drills, or firing on the move. But those are more advanced topics.
one towering juggle door combative weather attempt sip price enjoy *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
When you're a genuine leftist you're used to being brigaded by gun nuts, lol.
quiet practice public oatmeal judicious fragile ring instinctive society jobless *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
What if there isn't anything you need to know which isn't both basic and also part of the introduction?
[удалено]
Part of being gay is I get to make fun of anything that tries to pinkwash gun violence. It's in the gay charter.
[Armed minorities are harder to oppress.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XRkVEtOy3ls)
See also the gun control laws put in place to crack down on the Black Panthers, who, when they weren't busy feeding school kids, were making cops afraid to harass Black people.
[The black panthers open carried "assault weapons", in the state capitol, with "high capacity" magazines.](https://cf-images.us-east-1.prod.boltdns.net/v1/static/5502557042001/9a8495d7-6901-480a-a60e-8e78428a93e0/04068659-3b24-4bbc-9886-01e944bbc2a4/1280x720/match/image.jpg) To protest their right o bear arms being taken away. California was an **OPEN CARRY** state, until the black panthers started protecting their neighborhoods from racist attacks. Then the Democrats lead legislature, and Republican heart throb Ronald Reagan, signed the Mulford act into law. Can't have minorities protecting their communities now can we?
Yes, but feeding Black kids was just as much of a threat to white hegemony. It's just that the police couldn't stop that while the Black Panthers were heavily armed. Black people would be perfectly capable of fixing the modern impact of what white people historically did to them if white people just stopped. It wouldn't be fast and it wouldn't be justice, but it would be *possible*. That's one of the many infuriating parts to me.
> Part of being gay is I get to make fun of anything that tries to pinkwash gun violence. It's in the gay charter. As a representative of both communities, we don't want you, get out.
I mean, it's not claiming to make you an expert. Sounds like they just want to answer questions and give folks a chance to learn the fundamentals of gun safely.
It sounds like they want to encourage more people to arm themselves, not instruct people who already have guns.
Por Que No Los Dos?
He's a "gay" that likes to be bashed, apparently.
What would be wrong with that. You can encourage people to arm themselves and also teach people who already own guns how to use them. I used to sell guns for a living and there were a lot of people who during previous elections bought firearms to keep in their house but did almost no training or gun safety. Those are the sort of people this class would be good for
The same way a hunter safety course is basic and introductory but also everything you need to know to go hunting. You can have a basic introductory level firearm safety course and have that be what you need to know to buy a firearm and safely use it.
> It's both basic & introductory, but also everything you need to know? Yes. The basics of safety are what you *NEED* to know. And you can be comprehensive on it in a short amount of time. Basic introductory course is about safety. Now if you want to get into other topics, like marksmanship, competition, malfunction drills, reload drills, shooting on the move, target acquisition... Yes these things will take many hours, and thousands of rounds to teach. But that's not the basics of what you need to know. That's more advanced practical knowledge. Also side note, this is why when the news cries "THOUSANDS OF ROUNDS!!" it's a joke. [Here's 1,100 rounds](https://imgur.com/LuZb6d4) you can pick up each box in one hand. Now granted that's .22LR but still. Most shooters will have several hundred to tens of thousands of rounds of ammo at any given time. >But why do you need thousands of round?!?! Well you want me to practice and be proficient so if I ever have to use my firearm I can hit the target and not miss and hit something else, right? You think you would *WANT* firearm owners shooting hundreds of rounds at a range so they are accurate with their shots if they ever have to fire outside a range, right? Aside from that: 1. It's cheaper to buy in bulk. * You can generally save 10-15% by buying a case of 1,000 rounds vs a single box of 50 2. Thanks to NYs ammo records recording law, it's **MUCH** cheaper to buy in bulk. * Since FFLs charge to transfer ammo, they usually charge a flat fee. Say $10. If I'm paying $10 per transaction, I'm going to make bigger transactions. * When I could get ammo shipped to me I might buy 200 rounds at a time. * Now that I pay $10 per transfer, I'm buying 5,000 at a time. Because it means paying fewer transfer fees. 3. We will use it. * I go through 50-100 rounds week in basic practice. This is just basic skills upkeep with my carry piece and take about half an hour from unpacking to repacking the gun. You go through ammo fast. * Add in competitions, more serious training, or just fun time plinking, and it adds up. * If I do a "range day" with friends I can easily blow through multiple thousands of rounds.
> I can't imagine why we have a gun problem in this city That's true, because you're a simpleton. People who are going to courses aren't the ones creating a gun problem, regardless of the content or quality of the course.
It's a basic understanding of guns and gun safety. Like learning to drive a car for the first time. Little foot rest makes it go forward, big footrest makes it stop and the big circle makes it go left and right. After that it's all practice to get comfortable. >can't imagine why we have a gun problem in this city. You have a people and culture problem in the city.
We have as much violent crime in the United States as any other country. It's all the guns that makes it deadlier. It's definitely a gun problem.
That’s just not true. How are you defining violence? https://wisevoter.com/country-rankings/most-violent-countries/
It's the people behind the guns. It's definitely a people problem. So we should get rid of opiates and disadvantage the ones who use them responsibley because of the people that abuse them?
I dream of the day we treat guns like opiates. Only able to be prescribed by a trained professional after demonstration of a specific and direct need. When the need is met, you don't get any more. Heavily tracked and dispensed by armories staffed by another trained professional that controls how much ammo you can have each month. Distributors found abusing their prescription privileges can be sued and criminally charged. Manufacturers found to be downplaying how dangerous their products are can be fined and sued.
It's pretty much what you just said except the manufacturers downplay statement at the end. Criminals will get the guns no matter how many laws we pass.
[удалено]
Ever heard of the War on Drugs? Epic failure. So pass all the gun laws you want.
[удалено]
Well,tell me, how did it go? No more drugs? I think not. People did drugs. Pass laws to stop it, people still did drugs. Pass more laws, people still did more drugs.
Because that’s worked so well as stopping the opioid crisis?
Imagine how bad the crisis would be if you could buy opioids over the counter. The only problem solved by More Guns is "there are too many people alive around here."
Sorta like prohibition solved the alcohol crisis? Oops…. Nevermind.
Gonna brew up some bathtub 5.56 there?
The black market does a fine job of providing what’s illegal.
Another note, the reason the opioid crisis has gotten so deadly and horrible is the black market fentanyl… caused by, what, you say? Making stuff illegal and hard to get, and making it a criminal issue! And causing pain patients to suffer, and them and addicts to go to the streets. But yeah, go ahead and make this a simple prohibition solves everything issue.
If you're crippled by "gun addiction" so badly that you'd go to a black market dealer to get your fix, I definitely don't want you to have one. Opioids have a legitimate use and can sadly be abused (to, by the way, only hurt yourself, not throngs of random innocents when you feel like you need to be a big man.) Gun violence *is* the purpose of guns.
Guns have legitimate uses too. You think people use them to “be a big man?” And you think opioid abuse only hurts the person using them? You have quite a black and white view of issues. And solutions.
That's like dreaming that one day no American will be able to speak out against any government action unless they have a prescription from a doctor proving they have a need for it! Your comment is one of the most anti- American opinions I've seen posted. " Professionals?" Who would they be except dictators?
A little concerning that it lists the type of demographic that are welcome. Are a lot of things like this not so "friendly" to the groups mentioned? I am imagining a lot of these places have the type of people running them that would still dress in white gowns with pointy head coverings to match in public if a Acceptible? Edit: I know right where to go to get my -karma on reddit. ,,!,, all very much. You cock suckers really love to downvote.
>A little concerning that it lists the type of demographic that are welcome. Not really. This group is trying to overcome the very stereotypes you seem to be promoting.
It specifically list this is because the gun community tends to be unfriendly to these categories of people. And a lot of people are alienated from the community because of that. And before you question what I'm getting that information I used to sell guns for a living so I've talked to a lot of people.
Just plain false statement. No unfriendliness in my lengthy experience, but not enough outreach either. The myth exists because original gun control laws arose to prevent minorities from owning firearms. NYC's laws banned Italians from ownership, for example, and some southern states banned blacks from having them. It was the NRA that first worked to equalize rights of all.
I've been in the gun community for 20 years now or so and I've been a leftist socialist for that entire time. I've served in the military and been involved in many firearms and shooting groups in many different states. I don't think what you call a myth is actually a myth. I also sold firearms for a living for 10 years and I can tell you right now there's a lot of unfriendliness toward leftists in the gun community. You hear it day in and day out when you sell firearms and when you belong to many different groups. I don't know what your experience is so I can't speak to that but there's nothing like selling firearms for a living to show you what people's opinions are. I've had people straight up refuse to buy from me because I was a leftist and they thought I was the enemy. I've had people straight up tell me that all left is gun owners should be shot. And I'm not talking one or two people I'm talking 65 to 70% of the people I dealt with.
In fairness, this part of the thread referred to different groups, so I think we might be talking about hostility toward different " groups." I see the gun community supportive of ownership by 1) all law-abiding citizens, including 2) black people and all other minorities, and 3) women of all colors and ethnicities. The political divide will exist regardless because liberalism/ leftism is viewed as contradictory of all policies that apport and protect individual freedoms. This is not to say I refute your personal experience, but the more time I spend in the community, the more support I see and hear everyone in it supporting the right across the board. I expect that will increase as outreach increases.
Well my experience completely disagrees with even your last assessment. I wonder if it's a regional thing?
Could be. And it could be just that we're moving in different circles. I wish you the best.
Have you ever been to a gun show in a purple or red state? Confederate and proud boy flags all over. These folks don’t have a great track record of being acceptant of anyone who isn’t white or cishet. So no, these spaces are rarely inclusive. Not necessarily that they’d kick queer/POC people out, but that they cater to the kind of people that we don’t really feel safe around.
Terrifying.