This is a point that's probably very obvious to many Americans, but something I hadn't really considered about the second amendment and the like is that freedom is kind of zero-sum: a consequence of the right to bear arms is that armed guards might have to be stationed at schools, and that cops treat everyone like a potential armed criminal.
This last shooting will probably not lead to a meaningful change in gun-control, but it will create pretexts for this administration to crack down on certain political movements.
dudefeliciano · 1h ago
the idea of the right to bear arms was to overthrow a dictatorial government if need be, not to milsim in city centers or shoot up schools. The 2nd amendment is not really meaningful in the age of palantir and f35s.
padjo · 1h ago
If your “freedom” requires walking around backwards waving a pistol is it really freedom?
DicIfTEx · 43m ago
There are still many details yet to come out, and the future is as ever unwritten, but I think a better historical analogue for the killing of Charlie Kirk is Horst Wessel, who Goebbels turned into a martyr for the NSDAP.
bvvgpc · 2h ago
Interesting, what triggered the post now?
hackyhacky · 2h ago
I honestly cannot imagine why someone just now is posting an article about how a singular crime is used as a justification for a massive government power grab and an excuse to oppress the ruling party's political opponents, despite negligible evidence of any connection to the crime. [1]
This is what I return to every time when someone confuses morality and laws.
100% of Hitler's reign was legal. Everything he did was 100% legal.
Morality is and must be above laws.
(Edit: ChatGPT reminds me that Hitler's post-1933 actions were legal; the earlier (and failed) "Beer Hall Putsch" was illegal.)
aredox · 40m ago
Alas, this is the same argument that can be used against the 1st amendment and the political opposition: "Rejoicing in Kirk's death is immoral, therefore the 1st amendment doesn't apply, and let's abusively prosecute anyone we can tie to him in any way".
tomp · 38m ago
No it can’t, you’re literally confusing immoral with illegal in your comment.
dudefeliciano · 1h ago
which is also the excuse many nazis used at the nuremberg trials
This last shooting will probably not lead to a meaningful change in gun-control, but it will create pretexts for this administration to crack down on certain political movements.
[1] https://www.nytimes.com/2025/09/15/us/politics/jd-vance-char...
100% of Hitler's reign was legal. Everything he did was 100% legal.
Morality is and must be above laws.
(Edit: ChatGPT reminds me that Hitler's post-1933 actions were legal; the earlier (and failed) "Beer Hall Putsch" was illegal.)