You are viewing a single thread.
View all comments
253 points
*

You might be wondering why this information isn’t public already. Republicans passed a law to keep this information private. Yes, they’re protecting the identity of criminals selling guns to cartels.

Fucking vote

permalink
report
reply
29 points

But I was told to be angry at the brown people

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

I’m sure they’ll find the darkest person in the c-suite to use as a scapegoat.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

Last time I made a comment about US guns being sold to cartels I got down voted hard. A bunch of people telling me they would never buy a semi automatic when they have machine guns.

Some stuff just seems like it’s designed for cartels. Like their favorite handgun: El Presidente in 38 super

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

I’m voting to stop elites from disarming the proletariat

permalink
report
parent
reply
14 points

You mean against the “take the guns first” and “blue lives matter” party, right? You’re against authoritarians being able to take guns and being able to freely murder citizens who did nothing other than possess a firearm, right?

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

so Republican, got it.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

Why would they bother to disarm you? They make billions of dollars a year selling you guns and you’re no threat to them at all, physically or politically.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

I suggest helping implement Approval Voting and then Sequential Proportional Approval Voting so we can ditch the two party system and have more than one party that supports citizens protecting themselves without having to paradoxically supporting a bunch of policies that target citizens for harmless behavior.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

Ok but what if the proletariat are stupid and have bad taste?

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points
*

Then they shouldn’t get to vote either.

Edit: Hmm seems like people only like gatekeeping some rights. Interesting. Personally I think if stupid people deserve one right, they deserve the rest of them too, unless they prove themselves to be a danger to society of course which also applies to “the intelligent.”

And while we’re at it, what is your metric for stupid, not college graduates? Only engineers? “Only people who can spell, (in english)” and so fuck ESL people? Stupid is as stupid does frankly rather subjective, someone who you consider “stupid” for having bad grammar may be a math wizard, better than you, and you never knew, who then is stupid? Both? Neither? “Stupidity” is not a good enough metric to deny anyone any rights. Thank you for coming to my Ted Talk.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

It’s kept private because it would reveal most the guns passed through the government before getting to the cartels.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

If that is the case it’s still a bad law that we should work on repealing…

permalink
report
parent
reply
-60 points

Republicans passed a law to keep this information private.

They passed a law requiring the Mexican Government to keep it private? Fascinating…tell me more!

permalink
report
parent
reply
68 points

Per the linked article.

“Gun trace data is kept out of public view by a rider to a Congressional bill known as the “Tiahrt Amendment,” passed in 2003 to shield gun shops from scrutiny. Each year, the ATF provides a count of the guns recovered in Mexico that had been bought in the U.S., with no further details.”

Nothing to do with the Mexican govt. The US govt passed a law in 2003 to prevent gun sale data from being public record. This includes sales of firearms eventually used in armed conflicts in Mexico.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-38 points

Nothing to do with the Mexican govt.

I’m interested to know how the Mexican Government, who also had / has the trace data, is bound by the Tiahart Amendment.

I know it’s going to be an unpopular opinion but I really see no problem with the Tiahart Amendment shielding Firearms Manufacturers and Gun Stores. The Manufacturers are already regulated and monitored directly by the Federal Government and Gun Stores can only make sales in compliance with Federal Law. They should not be culpable in either Criminal or Civil court for that reason. The truth is that most of the organization who want that data aren’t working in Good Faith and only want it so they can launch lawsuits meant to force Manufacturers and Sellers out of business.

It gets even worse at the individual level. There is absolutely zero cause for firearm transaction records to an individual to be publicly available. It’s not only a gross violation of privacy but it’s also a security concern.

What you SHOULD be mad about is why the BATFE, who clearly and provably does have this data, isn’t doing something with it. They already know literally everything in this article and yet they don’t seem to be doing much about it. Why?

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

You should really make a token effort to read the article before trying to be a smug fuck about it.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-65 points

Yeah, its time for democrats to protect the identity of criminals selling guns to cartels.

Fucking vote

permalink
report
parent
reply
22 points

What

permalink
report
parent
reply
15 points

Troll. Downvote and ignore them.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-23 points

Just pointing out that no matter who you vote, everything stays the same

permalink
report
parent
reply

World News

!world@lemmy.world

Create post

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

  • Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:

    • Post news articles only
    • Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
    • Title must match the article headline
    • Not United States Internal News
    • Recent (Past 30 Days)
    • Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
  • Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think “Is this fair use?”, it probably isn’t. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.

  • Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.

  • Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.

  • Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19

  • Rule 5: Keep it civil. 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 another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.

  • Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.

  • Rule 7: We didn’t USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you’re posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple 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.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

Community stats

  • 12K

    Monthly active users

  • 16K

    Posts

  • 274K

    Comments