462
Calls for Democrats to be shot go unchallenged at Republican convention
(www.theguardian.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 13 Sep 2026
462 points (99.6% liked)
politics
31115 readers
2679 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- 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:
- Articles must be relevant to US politics and contain quality and original content. Social Media adjacent hosts like Substack are allowed, but ONLY if they tie back to a company/subsidiary. No personal or friend group blogs and no self-promotion. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and re-hosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- 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 other users of being bots or paid actors.
- No memes, trolling, misinformation, or low-effort posts/comments (including reposts). If you see posts like this that anger you, do not engage. Report, block, and live a happier life than they do. Any slap-fight is subject to comment removals. Fights full of rule violations will result in temporary bans to cool off.
- No manipulating votes via bots or alt accounts; this will result in permanent bans. 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.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in an account ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be permanently banned.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules and use critical thinking when reading, posting, and commenting. Users that repeatedly have 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. The reason(s) behind moderator action(s) are publicly available through the Modlog.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
As a gun owner and former small arms instructor, like... I'm happy, but I also feel like I got isekai'ed when I see fellow left sided folks imply that privately owned guns aren't basically the equivalent of the One Ring. They are simply a tool which bestows the ABILITY to use violence at a distance. What you choose to do with that ability is entirely up to the holder. A sword can be used as a shield as well, but a shield cannot be used as a sword if needed
Maybe not a sword, but shields can have spikes and sharp edges. Even as a blunt instrument a shield is a weapon not just a defense.
I'm going to press x on that one. What you say is true to an extent, but you would never grab a particularly pointy shield as your only weapon if you had to go on an offensive. Those things make it more effective from a defensive standpoint, but if I had to get into a fight I would choose a knife over any shield you could show me if I could only pick one, especially if I knew my opponent was going to also have an offensive weapon.
Really? You would pick a knife over a large blunt sheet strapped to your arm that can both block and bludegeon your opponent? Disregarding any sharp edges or spikes, a large shield can easily break bones if swung at someone.
In a knife vs. shield fight, the shield is an easy victor.
My original analogy is breaking down pretty fast here. I was trying to make the point that a purely defensive stance has to work 100% of the time, while an offensive weapon can serve both purposes to an extent. If I had known it was going to go this direction, I would have used the example of a Kevlar vest.
To answer your question though, 100% maybe. If my option was a butter knife. No. If we're talking about it decent 12 in knife or claymore or similar. Yes I would. If the flight is that dire, you can take a hard hit with a shield a couple of times, perhaps even a bone breaking one to an arm, and keep moving at a reduced capacity. As long as you can reach around one time and put the blade between their ribs while they're swinging a heavy shield, the fight is over. The point I'm trying to make, is that defense has to work 100% of the time, while offense only has to work once to do their respective jobs.
That's a spork...
It's more like a Swiss army knife. It has a lantern in it as well.
I've never been on the "ban all guns" side of the argument. I've had access to them since I was 10 and was a line coach when I was in the Navy. I'm just glad to see some of us on the left start to get it.
Navy as well. Was an FC, but got sent to Sami school because our SecO didn't trust any of the GMs to run his armory. lol. That was a fun cruise.
I was an stg, but because of "optimal manning" live fire exercises were made up of people throughout weapons dept.