Welcome • User Guide
ToS • Privacy • Canary
Donate • Bugs • License

©2026 Poal.co

1.3K

(post is archived)

[–] [deleted] • 2 pts

>Our goal is to provide an alternate to the mainstream, toxic, right-wing, and non-inclusive gun culture that has dominated the firearms community for decades.

This is going to turn out like those left-wing self-defense classes where they do stretches and shit and then pretend that slapping someone like a little bitch is going to make 'le ebil gnahtzee' stop. I hope they don't teach that toxic right-wing gun safety either and the members start accidentally killing each other, too.

[–] • 1 pt

Isn't this hypocritical?

[–] • 2 pts

Isn't what hypocritical?

This is a free society and we are allowing our vilest political opponents to arm themselves. Seems like the process is working just fine. Remember that the Tree of Liberty from time to time needs to be watered with the blood of tyrants and patriots alike. I hope to god that the 2A as a protection against tyranny, our option of last resort, is never really needed because it will be a bloody and messy affair.

[–] • 0 pt

I agree everyone who wants too should arm themselves. That I am on board with, but as far as I am aware in general people on the left are generally against fire arm ownership. I would agree with you on the 2A I think simply having it means its less likely that it will be needed. I believe the quote I've heard is an armed society is a polite society.

[–] • 1 pt (edited )

Freedom of Speech embodies the concept that open dialog and discussion will reveal the good ideas and destroy the bad ideas. The concept is that lies, deceptions and plain bad ideas cannot survive the scrutiny of uncensored discussion.

What most people do not realize is that the Second Amendment is an even stronger support of this concept. Folks seems to think that the 2A is all about what happens when discussion breaks down or that it allows people to ignore the result of discussion and impose their will regardless. But this could not be further from the truth. If in times of peace I advocate everyone arming themselves, then I have to assume that when the time of peace comes to an end that everyone, including my enemies, will be armed. Supporting the 2A is a de facto assertion that you think your ideas and principals can survive scrutiny. Support of the 2A as a protection against tyranny is only logical if you believe that more people will take up arms in support of YOUR cause as apposed to the cause of your enemy. Hearts and minds must be won before battles and revolutions can be won. The 2A is the ultimate expression of democratic ideals. It is Power to the People is a way that terrifies real socialists, communists and fascists alike.

The correlative rule is that those that would seek to destroy free speech and the 2A do so because they know that their cause and ideals are a lie.

[–] [deleted] • 0 pt

The far left: "Guns for me, but not for thee".

Gum is okay, though.