Replying to @⁨TIEPilot@lemmy.world⁩

No wonder your government is running rough shod(sic) over you…

Since you talk about the 2nd Amendment and Open Carry, I’m just going to assume that you’re American, as am I. I could be wrong but that would mean you’re just a shill.

If we’re both American that means the same government is running roughshod over both of us. The only difference is you have a bunch of guns that have never used against the “government” and probably will never get used against them. So please continue to espouse your violence while hiding behind a computer screen.

Replying to @⁨TIEPilot@lemmy.world⁩

At this point I have to assume you’re just a troll who’s trying to make actual gun owners look stupid to further the stereotype of all gun owners being second amendment trailer trash ass holes who don’t understand anything other than beer, guns and fucking. Because surely you can’t be that stupid. But, I’ve been proven wrong by other people’s stupidity before. Let’s just all be shocked someone with your intelligence level isn’t sitting in jail for a negligent discharge that killed someone.

Replying to @⁨TIEPilot@lemmy.world⁩

And yet despite all your bluster, Canada has more freedom and rights than the USA.

worldpopulationreview.com/…/freedom-index-by-coun…

By every metric measured Canada is better.

Also, your talking about people laying down, while your country is actively going down the shitter. Your boots are already off.

World Population ReviewFreedom Index by Country 2026Switzerland has the highest freedom score at 9.15. The US ranks as having the 15th most freedom globally. Compare freedom index scores across 165 countries.

Replying to @⁨TIEPilot@lemmy.world⁩

  1. Wrong country. We don’t do that up here. Overall, we find this results in fewer unnecessarily dead people.

  2. Let’s say he’d had a gun, and used it against the police. He would just have gotten hit with an additional charge that could have been anything from resisting arrest to first-degree murder, depending on how good a shot he was. So he’d still be in prison even after being proven innocent of the original charge. Real smart.

Replying to @⁨grte@lemmy.ca⁩

LOL you are in a country of ccp shills. Tell me how you lost one of the best cell phone manufactures to chinese spies. 30 million people and you can’t find housing because its all foreign owned…

I haven’t bought a gun in at least 7 years. Prolly cause I got all the ones I want (Others than a 686). But my dildo’s have value and use and you can’t have them up there.

Replying to @⁨nothanks@lemmy.4d2.org⁩

You can’t stop the state from committing violence with a handgun, for crying out loud. Or even with a million handguns. The state will always have better equipment than you, most of which doesn’t require anyone to get within handgun range if they don’t want to. Granted, big missiles make a tremendous mess and they’d rather not use them, but the possibility is always there.

Expecting citizen violence to overthrow a modern government that’s dead set on preventing it is, to put it politely, unrealistic. Unless you can convince the military to take your side or at least bow out, removing the government’s ability to exert force, but you aren’t going to accomplish that by directing violence at the military.

Replying to @⁨nothanks@lemmy.4d2.org⁩

In which country?

I keep on remembering a line from an old anime: “An unjust peace is better than a just war.” It keeps on floating through my head because it’s true for most people most of the time. Things have to get really bad—really bad—or at least you have to persuade people that they are, before you start seeing organized, armed insurrection on a large scale.

So what does it take? Lots of people being killed, maimed, or raped, at random and without any recourse, usually. Stealing enough children might also do it. Or a faction deliberately whipping the less-intelligent part of the population into a frenzy. Or really poor quality of life over the course of decades that makes people think they have nothing to lose. And even then it takes time if everything was peaceful for a generation or more before that, because at first people will hunker down and claim they’re dealing with “isolated incidents”, and that it can’t happen to them.

On the government side, what most governments want is to keep the economy running, because these days GDP is the measure of national success. For that, they need live workers and functioning civilian production equipment. That makes tear gas, handcuffs, and rubber bullets their weapons of choice and first resort.

For the government to haul out the big guns, one of two things has to happen. The first possibility is that it thinks it’s losing control to a point where it no longer has enough jack-booted thugs to keep its interests protected, and starts killing people and destroying material assets to make sure that at least no one else can have them.

The other possibility is that the upper echelons go completely Nazi Germany/Khmer Rouge level batshit, and enact bizarre murderous policies founded in deranged idealism. At that point, they often cease caring how they kill. (This includes governments that define some group of the people living in their country as subhuman.)

Are we going to see heavier munitions deployed in Canada over civil insurrection in the near future? I doubt it (and if it does happen, it’ll be in Alberta, not over the judiciary mistake from the original post). Is it going to happen anywhere in the world in the next decade? Possibly, because there are countries out there where people really do have nothing to lose and no way out, and governments whose grasp on power is shaky.

Replying to @⁨quill7513@anarchist.nexus⁩

In the UK, it’s because it’s the defence’s job to notice this kind of thing, but paying for a good lawyer is life-ruiningly expensive, and public defenders via legal aid are paid hourly, but have a cap on the number of hours that’s never enough to deal with anything properly, so are either rushing everything and miss things, or are massively overworked and earning well below minimum wage when their unpaid work is included.

I don’t know if the same problems extend to Canada, but it’s fairly likely, as the adversarial approach just inherently means the defence has to do loads of things that would be someone else’s job or not need doing at all under alternative systems, so you have to have a trained professional doing lots of work, and that’s inherently expensive, but taxpayers don’t like spending money on defending people who probably did crimes.