

Thats not a warning intended to keep the public safe, it’s a threat intended to get the public to give up on democracy
Late-diagnosed autistic, special interest-haver, dad, cyclist, software professional


Thats not a warning intended to keep the public safe, it’s a threat intended to get the public to give up on democracy


At this point I think it’s pretty safe to conclude that when the right-wing 2A guys argue that 2A is inviolable/shall not be infringed, they mean it only in the context of service to right-wing politics, not that it’s a right that applies to anyone else. In other words, they support the notion of privilege, not rights.


Anybody even the littlest bit surprised that he would say this sort of thing hasn’t been paying attention. Not a stunner at all.


To be clear, he essentially claimed that the US has the capability to forcibly do that- which isn’t so much an assertion that the US has any right to do a thing, it is that laws and rights are meaningless in his view. He’s framing a potential invasion or coup not supported by law or rights as if it’s legitimized by either, while fundamentally subverting the notion that anyone but the powerful have rights the US is bound to respect.
He doesn’t have the power to abolish 2a, he just has the ability to tell his DOJ to not investigate matters when his administration’s agents violate it. This constitutes a massive abuse of executive power, fostering a culture of impunity and abuse but we all should understand that if and when executive and legislative power fall out of the hands of this admin, these sorts of crime have very long statutes of limitations and accountability (if belated) is entirely in the cards