this post was submitted on 12 Sep 2025
295 points (98.7% liked)

politics

25611 readers
3480 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
 

Republicans and Democrats, including Reps. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Nancy Mace, are canceling events and taking other security precautions.

The assassination of conservative activist Charlie Kirk is sending shock waves through Capitol Hill, with lawmakers on both sides of the aisle expressing fears for their own safety and taking greater security precautions following a summer of political violence.

Members are beefing up their security, moving public events indoors or canceling them altogether. One is even vowing to carry firearms.

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., the progressive star who has faced numerous death threats over the years, said Thursday she had postponed two public events planned for this weekend in North Carolina, including a rally in Raleigh set for Sunday.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] mfed1122@discuss.tchncs.de 151 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (5 children)

If AOC is cancelling events it's because of fear of retaliatory action on the right, but NBC won't title it in such an honest way.

Also, "one is even vowing to carry firearms" lmao. I'm all for people's right to bear arms, but it doesn't protect you individually from an assassin. What, if only Kirk had a pistol on him, he could have whipped it out and shot the other bullet in half before it hit him, like the fucking Matrix?

[–] Treczoks@lemmy.world 3 points 17 hours ago

And to take up the gun-nuts usual spiel: this time, the people had the good guy with the gun to defend them against Kirk.

[–] PwnTra1n@lemmy.world 42 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Had someone tell me they had a problem cuz he wasn’t even able to defend himself. The gymnastics to not blame gun violence when he was literally shot while talking about shootings.

[–] gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works 11 points 21 hours ago* (last edited 21 hours ago) (1 children)

Shot immediately after finishing a sentence in which he spouted racist dog whistle bullshit about the predominant demographics of mass shooters, as he was sitting under an easy-up emblazoned with PROVE ME WRONG.

The marksman:

okay, well, since you asked so nicely…

Genuinely, the comedic timing was jaw-droppingly impeccable.

[–] postmateDumbass@lemmy.world 7 points 17 hours ago (1 children)

Not sure if this is official onion or not, but this one hit bullseye.

Ngl the memes about Artery Charlie are just absolute 🔥🔥🔥

[–] mfed1122@discuss.tchncs.de 23 points 1 day ago (2 children)

It's always depressing yet eye-opening to hear the opinions of people at the grassroots. The average citizen of America truly is so unfathomably dumb. Even the lower class of the 1700s probably had better critical thinking skills. We might even be setting all time records here.

[–] frezik@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 16 hours ago

There are some arguments, like the "not able to defend himself" one, that are so mindbogglingly stupid that I don't even know what to say in response.

Which might be their rhetorical purpose.

[–] krashmo@lemmy.world 12 points 1 day ago* (last edited 17 hours ago) (2 children)

People have always been this dumb as a whole. We're apes who decided talking shit to each other is better than throwing shit at each other. If a few dozen of us hadn't gotten lucky enough to figure out some amazing things over the centuries we'd all still be praying to the god of the hunt to bring back the buffalo herd next season so we don't starve to death.

[–] BCsven@lemmy.ca 6 points 18 hours ago* (last edited 18 hours ago)

There's a good book called "Not for Profit" came out around 2010 and describes how the systematic erosion of arts/literature, the Humanties, from school systems, is being replaced by bare minimum to train workers. Creating a dumb population that can't think for themselves, makes it easy for government control with no resistance

[–] kreskin@lemmy.world 3 points 23 hours ago

If throwing shit was socially acceptable I'd definitely choose that over talking.

[–] SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca 3 points 19 hours ago

AOC has had a target on her for years.

[–] LibertyLizard@slrpnk.net 15 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

Not just for assassins. Carrying a gun is negative for your physical safety in general.

[–] Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In@lemmy.world 9 points 1 day ago (3 children)

I believe you, but can we see the stats behind that statement?

[–] LibertyLizard@slrpnk.net 6 points 17 hours ago (1 children)

https://publichealth.jhu.edu/center-for-gun-violence-solutions/research-reports/gun-violence-in-the-united-states

Carrying firearms in public also increases the risk for violence by escalating minor arguments and increasing the chances that a confrontation will become lethal. Research has found that even the mere presence of a firearm increases aggressive thoughts and actions.20 

Some believe that carrying a firearm will act as a deterrent and help prevent conflicts or minimize harm. While there are specific examples where this was true, there are many more cases where firearm carrying escalates conflict and leads to firearm injury or death. In aggregate, research shows firearm carrying increases levels of violent crime.21

[–] BCsven@lemmy.ca 2 points 18 hours ago* (last edited 18 hours ago)

The commenter may provide a link but if you at an overview take a look at Canada vs USA. In Canada you can get your gun license at 12 for using a firearm, and need to be maybe 16 or 18(I forget) to purchase one. But we don't have a gun culture of carrying in public. Then look at the USA. Not only is everyone gun happy, they actually live in fear. Gun deaths are often from their own gun used on them.
It also gives every gun toter a false sense of security, and Imma be a hero mentality, leading to deaths.

[–] BeMoreCareful@lemmy.world 1 points 22 hours ago

That does sound fascinating. I'd imagine stress would play a roll.

[–] Cruxifux@feddit.nl 9 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Just tell chuck schumer to take over for all her events.

[–] Zugyuk@lemmy.world 3 points 19 hours ago

We don't need that many letters 🤣

[–] billwashere@lemmy.world 7 points 1 day ago

I see what you did there 🤣