this post was submitted on 13 Mar 2024
120 points (86.1% liked)

The Right Can't Meme

851 readers
1 users here now

About

This community is about making fun of dumb right wing memes. Here you will find some of the cringiest memes that the right has ever posted on the internet.

Rules

  1. All posts must be memes containing right wing cringe

  2. No unrelated content

  3. No bigotry

  4. Spammers and Trolls will be instantly banned. No Exceptions.

Other Communities

!desantisthreatensusa@lemmy.world

!leftism@lemmy.world

!antitrumpalliance@lemmy.world

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] MrJameGumb@lemmy.world 5 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (5 children)

They appear to be saying that if they aren't allowed to own military style automatic weapons for "home defense" then they want all freedoms of speech revoked across all media platforms. I'm not sure what one has to do with the other, but that seems to be the gist of the message.

Edit: my poor spelling

[–] RestrictedAccount@lemmy.world 13 points 6 months ago

The Second Amendment does not protect hunting.

It protects against assholes like Trump and his MAGAts taking over.

[–] nBodyProblem@lemmy.world 6 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

The first assumed premise is that we all agree that free speech extends across modern mediums, it’s a rhetorical device to show why it’s weird to say the second amendment doesn’t apply to modern technology.

Honestly, as a liberal, I don’t understand why other liberals oppose modern firearms in private hands. The entire purpose of that amendment is to allow the weak in our society to fight against dictatorship and tyranny; the right to own firearms is an eminently liberal value.

In a world where we have this terrible person openly trying to set himself up as dictator, with a nonzero chance of actually achieving his goal, how can you reject the amendment that specifically exists to allow us to resist people like him? It has to extend to effective modern weapons to do us any good.

[–] the_crotch@sh.itjust.works 3 points 6 months ago

What you appear to be saying is that both major political ideologies in this country are actively trying to strip our rights and what they disagree on is which should be taken first

[–] shalafi@lemmy.world 2 points 6 months ago (2 children)

Love the "military" argument. LOL, like it's some kinda gotcha.

American's have always had equivalent, and usually better, rifles than the military. History lesson. Title sucks, and that premise isn't asked or answered. Also, heard the presenter is a right-winger. Still, nothing he's saying in untrue or a half-truth.

And what do we think the guys who put that in there would think if someone had said, "Nah. Let 'em have guns, but they gotta be nerfed against the military. We want the cops and military all powerful." 😆 "Have you not been to any of the previous meetings?!"

[–] nBodyProblem@lemmy.world 3 points 6 months ago

Yup. They literally encouraged people to own and operate private warships that could be used for coastal bombardment. The modern equivalent would be a guided missile cruiser.

They would probably have LOVED everyone having AR-15s if it were an option 😂

[–] yesman@lemmy.world 1 points 6 months ago

We want the cops and military all powerful.” 😆 “Have you not been to any of the previous meetings?!”

So an armed citizenry prevents unjustified government violence? I think you've skipped a meeting or two.