This makes sense. If one of your political platforms is to weaken and reduce the police force, then buying a gun is a very logical and practical thing to do.
Quite the opposite. The increased fear is that there will be bad actors (brownshirts, racists, klansmen, etc) that the police are not making an effort to restrain, or even with whom the police are are allied.
Your average liberal/progressive is still probably less afraid (relative to the median) about random or property crime.
It is more like if you have to worry about masked goons breaking into your house and trying to kidnap you or your family members then maybe you can't trust the government either.
Wait, what? I thought the main leftward argument against the necessity of the second amendment was that we can now trust our government to not overstep its authority and people protecting themselves against tyranny was no longer needed?
From my understanding, the issue with the police in the US is that they have to do to much, work as EMT, social services, mental health services, community police (proximity police? basically neighborhood cop), peacekeepers (during protests or organized events), investigating, policing traffic...
So you actually have a big "company" responsible for something you could dispatch to at least 4 other services (i've heard call to divided it in 7 parts, but i can't find where i read that, so let's be reasonable and say 4), and they have too much political power because of it. Divide the budget accordingly, correctly train teh police and "new police", call it "police" too because branding works and to stop people from crying out in fear ("mental health police" might not be the best brand, but other might work), and actually separate departements, and concerns. Separate training material, separate training place, split the union. Also make a department that will take care of orphaned police kids.
"Divide the police" is a way better catchphrase anyway.
This seems dishonest. Surely the liberal position - on average - is the rejection of dangerous police, even if that means rejecting a large number of police officers, until the police force (nationally and/or locally) is once again a trustworthy foundation of democratic civilization? The unfortunate reality is that, when you have a class of people with authority and guns, even if only a small minority of them are dangerous, that immediately ruins the image of the whole thing until they are rooted out. Americans have historically proven that, if there's one thing they won't stand for, it's being oppressed/frightened by those in power.
That might be the liberal position on average, but if you have a social circle that’s lefter than average, as in many metro areas, you’ll occasionally hear a desire for outright abolition of police. Not even a simple local constabulary walking the beat, as there is a meme going around that such law enforcement came out of gangs that hunted down fugitive slaves and is inherently tainted. (Nevermind the existence of such police in countries around the world that never had race-based chattel slavery.) Instead, more investment in social services will supposedly remove the need for them entirely.
But of course, whether that position or the number of people who hold it, has any real influence on gun sales is doubtful and the GP may have been a bait post.
No, this doesn't make any sense because the "liberals" have not been recently voted into power in order to achieve their political platforms. The opposite has occurred - they are the powerless ones.
lukev|3 months ago
Your average liberal/progressive is still probably less afraid (relative to the median) about random or property crime.
Jensson|3 months ago
But random crime is much more likely to affect you than brownshirts or klansmen, so that seems irrational.
seanmcdirmid|3 months ago
kcplate|3 months ago
orwin|3 months ago
So you actually have a big "company" responsible for something you could dispatch to at least 4 other services (i've heard call to divided it in 7 parts, but i can't find where i read that, so let's be reasonable and say 4), and they have too much political power because of it. Divide the budget accordingly, correctly train teh police and "new police", call it "police" too because branding works and to stop people from crying out in fear ("mental health police" might not be the best brand, but other might work), and actually separate departements, and concerns. Separate training material, separate training place, split the union. Also make a department that will take care of orphaned police kids.
"Divide the police" is a way better catchphrase anyway.
happytoexplain|3 months ago
HeinzStuckeIt|3 months ago
But of course, whether that position or the number of people who hold it, has any real influence on gun sales is doubtful and the GP may have been a bait post.
jerlam|3 months ago