this post was submitted on 14 Jun 2025
1023 points (99.4% liked)

politics

24176 readers
3547 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

The Minnesota governor said that the path to tyranny "is littered with people telling you you’re overreacting"

Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz was testifying before Congress about his state's handling of immigration when he learned Sen. Alex Padilla, D-Calif., was forcibly removed from a Department of Homeland Security news conference Thursday.

The irony, he told the attendees of the Center for American Progress’ “Listening to Lead” event Friday, was in lawmakers grilling him and his colleagues, Govs. Kathy Hochul, D-N.Y. and JB Pritzker, D-Ill., over the “incredible crime of treating people like human beings” as FBI agents tackled a sitting senator to the ground and handcuffed him in Los Angeles.

“I am not prone to hyperbole. I am prone to, like, popping off a little bit. I know that,” Walz said, prefacing his argument that Americans are living in a “dangerous” time. “I believed all along we were marching towards authoritarianism, and people were telling me in December, ‘You know, you're overreacting.’ And I said, “The road to authoritarianism is littered with people telling you you're overreacting.”

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Rentlar@lemmy.ca 16 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Might be the time for Minnesota to join Canada, Tim. Think big.

If you want to end politically-motivated gun violence becoming normalized, time to leave the USA and ban guns not used for hunting or within shooting ranges.

[–] ohshit604@sh.itjust.works 2 points 19 hours ago* (last edited 19 hours ago) (1 children)

time to leave the USA and ban guns not used for hunting or within shooting ranges.

Respectfully Canada has been taking it too far with their gun control.

Canada has rightfully banned assault rifles/firearms for personal use back in the 90’s however, recently they’ve been banning guns solely based on appearance calling them “assault style firearms”, just because a firearm looks like it belongs in the military does not mean it was designed for such use.

Edit: I made a post a while back about the Crusader Arms Crypto rifle entirely designed to comply with the recent ban’s on firearms however, the Government of Canada had it reclassified as a prohibited rifle.

I can attest to the fact that these current bans effect people like myself who enjoy sport shooting at ranges or in the wilderness on crown-land, if a criminal has possession of an illegal firearm there is no chance they’ll lawfully turn it over.

[–] Rentlar@lemmy.ca 3 points 19 hours ago (1 children)

I totally understand that overreach makes hunting and recreational shooting activities a lot more difficult.

On the flipside, it means that assembly in Canada is peaceful by default without the constant threat of escalation into gun violence as can happen in the USA. It means that in our cities, 19 times out of 20 we only have to worry about pointy objects being potentially used as weapons by people walking down the street rather than guns.

The styling of firearms is just for show over safety I agree. But maintaining a culture of responsibly using firearms as a privilege of partaking in the sport, rather than as a right, is a distinction that gives us Canadians a better quality-of-life overall. There's far fewer grey areas in Canada as to where and what guns should be legally used for.

[–] ohshit604@sh.itjust.works 2 points 14 hours ago* (last edited 13 hours ago)

I absolutely agree with your entire comment and have little to rebuttal against however, with our current governments overreach I fear that we’re being treated unjustly given that the recent bans were enacted via an Order In Council by the previous PM and not through Parliament or the House of Commons.

I understand public safety is the primary concern here but it’s not licensed/registered firearms causing the increase in our crime, I’ve preached this numerous times on Lemmy, it’s illegal firearms smuggled across the US/Canada border that land in the hands of people intending to commit crime.

No person is going out of their way to pay & complete the CFSC, apply for a PAL/RPAL, agree to daily background checks from the RCMP, purchase a firearm that has to be registered to them to then commit petty crimes.


I should note that StatsCan does not differentiate firearm crime from illegal firearms and legal firearms which is ridiculous, we need this data for this debate.