Maybe guns are bad, and maybe if you bring a rifle to a high tense situation and hold it in any manner that may seem threatening, you deserve to get shot.>

Maybe guns are tools, and maybe if the majority of protesters were visibly armed then the police would not escalate tense situations to high intensity riot conditions and beat the protesters. Had the state had to hesitate to use violence on peaceful protesters, at least there would be a bunch less abuse of the media and civilians.

The Black Panthers proved this, which is why Reagan started gun control. Modern open carry armed protests have also proven it’s still true. Cops are cowards, Uvalde proved that, even with superior equipment they will find a reason not to start. Getting the left to disarm and put their protection into the hands of the very governmental authority they continually protest against has got to be the biggest con job in history

The question they replied to was where the pro 2A people were. The point of 2A is that the armed populace meets or exceeds the armed tyrants. One person with a gun can’t stop hundreds of cops with battle gear, that’s the point of everyone having a right to be armed.

I would hazard a guess that in this context their answer is probably yes, they expect to need to protest with other pro gun (armed) protesters if they were going to be armed.

Ask the Black Panthers how well only one or two people being armed in a protest worked against the cops, compared to everyone being armed. There is a reason Reagan started gun control, and it wasn’t because his supporters were the ones that were armed.

Yeah, but this is a little like protesting against gun violence by juggling loaded handguns and putting everything on the safeties working perfectly. You don’t protest an unsafe amusement park by going on the unsafe rides standing up.

Point being, most people would probably not want to serve as the example of what not to do. Most rules/regulations are written in blood, but most people aren’t volunteering to be the ink to pen those regulations.

Certainly, it is perfectly valid to just want ideal outcomes for all individuals regardless of the system. You are also not required in any way to discuss your viewpoints with anyone. I will thank you for your time up to this point, and wish you a wonderful day.

I do hope the judge looked him dead in the eyes at the sentencing and said “Bad dog” before rubbing his nose in the evidence bags.

On the positive side, he should be out after 2.13 human years. Sooner with good behavior and completion of an obedience class from a licensed training academy.

That makes the conservative talking point of anchor babies a real thing. Make your way onto US soil to give birth by any means necessary, and suddenly you are granted a pathway to citizenship and a guaranteed legal status from day one?

That kind of massive shortcut of the immigration system would break the system. Birth tourism would skyrocket along with all other forms of illegal immigration. There is a reason no country on earth allows that.

Do you not think that doing so would be a huge incentive driving illegal border crossings or visa overstays to take such a shortcut? Do you think that creating a parallel alternative immigration pathway such as that is a good thing?

I certainly disagree with how the trump administration is operating, and fuck anyone who says non-citizens don’t have a right to a day in court, but how can carving out loopholes and shortcuts be good for the long term health of the system? Unless crippling the system to the point of implosion to cause a reform is the goal, but I find that to be too close to the conservatives crippling other public sector programs to cause private sector reform to profit off it.

This is a bit of a catch 22, the child wasn’t deported her parents were. I don’t even doubt that ICE was lazy and didn’t make sure the mother knew what was happening and every option available to their child. This is a shit show how Trump is handling mass deportation instead of expanding the immigration courts to process the backlogs and get everyone their constitutionally protected day in court. ICE has been done a disservice by Trump and deserves a lot of the shit the department is getting.

The child is a US citizen, 100%, but that doesn’t offer protection from prosecution to their parents. A 2 year old who’s US citizen parent or parents commit a crime will have their parent/parents taken away when put in jail, and then be given into the custody of a relative or taken into foster care. This is not unique to immigration.

Would you rather the child have been unilaterally taken from their mother and placed into US foster care when no family was identified that could take them in the US? Then we are separating children from their families, which is fucked up.

There historically have been limited stays of deportation available for illegal immigrant parents of US citizen children, but this administration is obviously being extremely tough on those. If you want to give automatic deportation immunity to anyone who has a child on US soil until those children are legally adults, you turn “anchor babies” from being basically a myth into an actual reality.

There is no perfect solution for any of this.

Lemmying in the bathroom as one does, and you caused me to drop another Seagal by trying to hold my laugh in. I salute you.