Mass Deportations Round One

Again, it depends.

And maybe you don't understand it's not about "standing up for (my) rights." It's about deciding whether self-defense or submission is the wiser course. If someone already has me covered, it would be suicidal to draw on them.

So...if someone is slightly darker skinned and was facing the possibility of being shipped to Africa without due process, is it just possible that their calculus might be a little different?

Nope. You can't use simple fear of government incompetence as a basis for the use of lethal force.

When "government incompetence" means you might get shipped without due process to a concentration camp, I think that would be a basis.

By your standards, the Jews should have happily marched to the gas chambers.

Also: Breonna Taylor and her boyfriend disagree.

So where is the fear of tyranny that 2nd amendment fetishists use to justify owning guns? Sounds like you just eliminated that justification.

Are we talking about personal self-defense or resistance to tyranny, because the 2nd covers both but the two scenarios are not the same.

These statements are NOT mutually exclusive:
1. Armed citizens can resist tyranny
2. Armed citizens can use lethal force to defend themselves in situations where they or others are threatened with immediate harm
3. There are situations where, despite being armed, a citizen's wisest response to aggression is to submit

So, Waco Davidians.
Martyrs or idiots?

Not mutually exclusive.

Idiotic in that they were kooky apocalyptics following a crazy dude.

Martyrs in that the government used force way beyond what was necessary, both in the initial siege and the assault on the compound. They should've just picked up Koresh in town.

You can be a moron and still be unjustly treated.

Therefore Sandwich Guy is the greatest martyr of all.
I win.
Close the thread.
Close the board.
Close the whole internet.

Actually, it's more accurate to say:
Resistance to tyranny is always self defense, but self-defense is not always Resistance to tyranny.

Yes. It's called cowardice.
It's interesting to me that the people most adamant about needing guns to fight tyranny are also the ones most willing to submit to tyranny.

Kinda like that the loudest Holocaust deniers also think it was a good idea.

Let me know when this tyranny arrives. And if you think it's a good idea to go for your gun when someone's got a gun at your head...

So you think the only options to someone pointing a gun at your head is to either meekly surrender or go for the one act of resistance almost guaranteed to fail.

*Pulls out mini MP3 recorder*
A choose-your-own-adventure political cartoon called "optoons".

Don't tell me: you're a kung fu master, too.

Inasmuch as the hypothetical can't present every imaginable real world glimmer of possibility, yes, compliance or resistance are about your only options in that scenario. Maybe shit yourself and hope they get disgusted and run away?

If you don't know who you're dealing with, initiating a struggle with an armed opponent who already has you covered is likely to be suicidal. Best case: it's a cop. And you might still get shot.

Maybe, just maybe, with better gun control it wouldn't be such a mystery about who exactly is pointing a gun at you.

...I don't get it.
Google images gave me nothing.

Oh, I thought you were referencing Authors Anonymous!
Tell you what: Watch Authors Anonymous, and I'll watch Stand By Me.

Ah, make guns illegal then you won't have trouble with them.

Just like how we fixed drugs and alcohol.

That would carry more weight if it hadn't worked so well in the UK and Australia.
It would also carry more weight if I had ever advocated actually banning guns in America.

Okay. So you want gun control that doesn't ban guns because it worked so well in places where they banned guns. Got it.

Again with that reading comprehension.
I oppose gun ownership on principle. But I don't think that means guns need to be banned in the USA.
With me so far? Okay. Now:
You (and others) always jump to banning guns as the only gun control being advocated. And while that's not what I'm advocating, that's also not something I'm opposed to either.

I'm glad you cleared that up.

Given that this is a thread specifically about the behavior of ICE/CPB/DHS in regards to mass deportation....

If this doesn't look like tyranny to you then you're basically confirming all that you have been accused of here. One wonders whether, if government officials were using exactly the same tactics - but their objective was to confiscate all the guns, would THAT look like tyranny to you?
(Don't default to "well the second amendment..." - the question is about tactics)

I see tyranny as a transgression against people's rights. I don't see the people being deported as having a right not to be deported when they're here in violation of our law.

This situation was created when millions of illegals were let in with the cynical purpose of increasing Democratic voters. Now that they're here, do you expect me--and millions of others who were deeply opposed to this--to say "Oh, well?" To accept this as a fait accompli?

Fat chance. I voted for this. I want and expect it to happen.

Now, that doesn't mean I excuse any truly improper action by agents of the government, but ICE is acting with legal authority. If you disagree, take them to court.

Yes, if the government were using similar--indeed, ANY--tactics to assault my rights, I'd be (pardon the pun) up in arms about it. But they aren't, so I'm not.

*Waves a photo of Rümeysa Öztürk in Paladin's face*

Paladin- *Avoidance software chroma-keys her to invisible*.....

*Puts a Rümeysa Öztürk doll in Paladin's hands to feel*

Paladin- *Emergency sleep modes*..

Methodology very much matters. Even of the objective is noble, you can't be brutal in executing it when you can accomplish the task without it (i.e. excepting declared war)

I'm going to assume this is disingenuous because the alternative is to conclude you are bottomlessly gullible (like basically every MAGA voter)

So you support brutality because you're such an easy mark that you consider it a just response to the utter fiction that was poured into your (apparently roomy) skull

Tear gassing kids? Rousting a whole building on a false pretense? Detaining ligal residents and even citizens? Ambushing documented residents at their legally required appointments and deporting them anyway? The list goes on and on. You voted for, expected, and are pleased with THIS methodology?

Courts keep telling them "you can't" and they keep doing it anyway. Law and order, eh?

So the government is perfectly allowed to fuck over other people's lives as long as it amuses you and doesn't affect your own life.

Imagine my lack of shock that this is your worldview.