this post was submitted on 13 Mar 2024
67 points (100.0% liked)

The Right Can't Meme

22 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
 
top 15 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] po-lina-ergi@kbin.social 43 points 7 months ago (1 children)

For anybody who doesn't understand the argument, it's specifically a rebuttal to the idea that "The second amendment only applies to muzzle loaded muskets because nothing more advanced existed at the time"

"Free speech only applies to newspapers and soapboxes because nothing more advanced existed at the time"

[–] GlitchyDigiBun@lemmy.dbzer0.com 22 points 7 months ago

It's not a bad counterargument to that claim, we've just moved so far past that into the cost-benefit-analysis stage. The cost to keep the 2nd ammendment as it is is pretty fucking high.

[–] JackGreenEarth@lemm.ee 17 points 7 months ago (2 children)

The problem is taking the amendments as unchangeable and almost divinely commanded. They were things written by people hundreds of years ago, and they can be changed. They're literally called amendments. It doesn't matter whether the second amendment protects gun rights, it's up to us nowadays to decide if we want people to have the right to a gun, decided based on our ethical arguments, not what an old document says.

I say this as a non American, it's just pretty weird to me that even the anti gun people defend their position by quoting the second amendment (usually), rather than suggesting changing it.

[–] SweetBilliam@midwest.social 7 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Changing it is very difficult. It takes 2/3rds of our legislative branch agreeing. We don't see that much.

[–] ThunderclapSasquatch@startrek.website 2 points 7 months ago (1 children)

It says something about how fucking nuts Prohibition was that the states agreed to it and then agreed that was a terrible idea.

[–] idiomaddict@feddit.de 1 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

It was a huge womens rights movement issue at the time. They weren’t all prudes, they just thought it would be a more effective way to cut back on domestic violence than going at it directly (more enforceable and politically viable), iirc. Then everyone hated it.

One reason is you can't change Amendments, only repeal and add them. Second you need 2/3 of all 50 state legislatures or Congress to ah Gree before even start that process, ratification requires 3/4 of the states to agree, it's a fucking process from hell

[–] Jake_Farm@sopuli.xyz 10 points 7 months ago (1 children)

If you are scared of semi-automatic rifles, wait until you find out about fully-semi-automatic rifles.

[–] survivalmachine 3 points 7 months ago (1 children)

What do the mass shooting statistics say? More mass killings with full auto, semi-auto, or non-auto firearms? Or does the type not matter and they're all pretty much used equally? I always hear about semi-auto, but the media never mentions full auto rifles in school shootings and such. Or whatever fully-semi-automatic means.

[–] apotheotic 1 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Fully semi automatic (probably) refers to semi auto with a modification like a bump stock

[–] Jake_Farm@sopuli.xyz 1 points 7 months ago (1 children)

No I'm referring to the nonsense term used by news casters when talking about semi-auto guns. Fully-semi-auto don't exist.

[–] apotheotic 2 points 7 months ago

Cool! It's hard to catch sarcasm over text :)

[–] fl42v@lemmy.ml 4 points 7 months ago

While the author of the meme seems to be unfamiliar with the concept of causality, the last part doesn't seem that wrong if you look at Assange, for example...

[–] LodeMike@lemmy.today 3 points 7 months ago

Well it doesn't "apply" to nuclear weapons so.

And it literally does apply to ALL weapons.

[–] moon@lemmy.cafe 2 points 7 months ago

It's literally communist north Korea's if I don't have a nuke detonator up my ass at all times