181
Supreme Court to hear arguments over Mexican government's suit against U.S. gunmakers
(www.cbsnews.com)
this post was submitted on 03 Mar 2025
181 points (98.4% liked)
News
27004 readers
4203 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. 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. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
The NRA was suddenly in favor of gun control after the Black Panthers started patrolling with guns.
I despise the NRA but this kind of revisionist history needs to be called out.
First off prior to 1977 the NRA had an established history of supporting Gun Control. It didn't suddenly pop into being because of the Black Panthers.
Second when the Mulford Act was passed in 1967 it started a sea change at the NRA that culminated with the "Revolt at Cincinnati" in 1977. The NRA as an organization supported Mulford, like it had other Gun Control legislation for at least 50 years, but it's very clear that their membership did NOT and they took over the organization to keep it from continuing.
Today's NRA is a completely different beast than the one that existed in 1967. It's primary faults are that it got corrupt as fuck and that it's entirely silent whenever there's a conflict between lawful gun owners and law enforcement.
Regardless, the point stands. The NRA wasn't "suddenly in favor of gun control after the Black Panthers", it already had multi-decade history of supporting Gun Control.
Interesting history lesson.
So, is your stance that a leftwing armed resistance movement shooting CEOs wouldn't cause the right-wing gun lobby to support gun control like they used to?
No group is a monolith, especially groups numbering in the tens of millions, so of course some number of right-wing gun owners would suddenly swing to supporting gun control however those folks would be in the minority. I simply can't foresee the majority of right-wing gun owners suddenly regaining their appetite for gun control in anything less than literal decades.
With that answered what about the left-wing anti-gun lobby? Since essentially every politician to the the left of US Representative Brian Fitzpatrick has been on a decades long crusade for ever increasing gun control how would they react to more CEO shootings?
What the rank and file gun owners want seems kind of irrelevant, I think the ones who actually write and pass laws will disregard whatever they think to protect their own interests.
There is no significant left wing in the US.
The liberal antigun lobby would go insane, of course, but it's not like they'd change any of their positions. They'd still want stricter gun control regardless of the material reality.
That an interesting viewpoint given the decades those rank and file gun owners have spent fighting an uphill battle to forestall new gun control measures while getting old ones rolled back. They've done a phenomenal job of forcing lawmakers to bend to their will.
It's sort of the point of my NRA history lesson. When gun owners decided they wouldn't tolerate any more shenanigans in their name they literally overthrew the most powerful pro gun lobby in existence and then used it to bludgeon law makers into doing what they wanted. That's about as much political power as any group of regular people can ever hope to have.
I doubt the majority of that group is going to allow themselves to be silenced over a few CEOs getting popped.
NRA leadership, and thus its agenda, is mostly determined by the firearms industry and large donors. Sure they have elections (where something like 7% of members vote), but board directors are basically just chosen by the nominating committee which is itself partially directly appointed by industry without election and the elected members of the committee have ties to the industry.
They're all also quite wealthy.
It's not gun owners that actually decide NRA policy, it's manufacturers and retailers and rich enthusiasts. If rich people were suddenly concerned about leftists gunning them down in the streets they'd change their stances on gun control real quick.
Modern gun control laws started in response to black people arming themselves.
From the stamp act to reagan, to bill Clinton. Reagan specifically is why California is ahead of the rest of the US on laws banning firearms, because Reagan kicked it off while Governor.
Using the word "modern" lessens the message. Gun Control has always always always been about keeping minorities from arming themselves and the racist trash are still at it today.
https://lemmy.today/pictrs/image/69d9d636-029c-4788-aee2-f6c306d72b39.jpeg
Can't have Black people walking around with the ability to defend themselves from murder.