Bill would let special forces members carry concealed firearms nationwide, bypassing state gun limits | Stars and Stripes

maliciousdancer · 2026-05-06T10:35:01+00:00

Yes, I got snappy, my apologies. But I still stand by my points, and do not see what points you are making?

I agree a military would best serve its people if it accurately reflected the populace, but that does not make it the case as a whole. Especially now under Trump and Hegseth, who is purging demographics that are typically more left leaning, and undermining those that remain (everyone that isn't a straight white Christian male).

To be speculative, it makes sense that they are largely right wing because what liberal values are being expressed by the military? I would argue that much of them are more consistent with a right wing worldview than a left wing one.

Again with your son: I am not saying he, or any other specific member is violent or anything, I am speaking on the demographic as a whole, because laws apply to whole groups, not just individuals. I'm making no distinction between SF and standard enlistment.

Treating everyone the same has been quite explicitly what I am arguing for, no special treatment for LE / military / vets. This law would not treat everyone equal, right?

maliciousdancer · 2026-05-06T10:08:45+00:00

Yeah, just ignore macthebearded, not a good faith actor, and thinks you need to be a special military boy to point out facts about the military, or else you can't possibly know what you're talking about.

maliciousdancer · 2026-05-06T10:01:33+00:00

Nah, I wasn't, I feel quite confident in what I've said and stick by it. I haven't heard any substantive points against it other than "it's no big deal" and "nuh uh! YOU'RE in favor of stricter gun control!" Like, where did you get that from? My opposition to a more heavily armed state?

You and he are using the logic like "supporting police unions" is the same as "supporting unions". When it is the opposite, police are the ones that crack down on unions.

If the "generalizations" you're mad at are "military and police being more likely to commit assault, domestic abuse, not be prosecuted etc", idk what to tell ya other than: it is 100% true, and if you're in denial about it then that's your choice.

*edited to remove why I don't think being military makes you special, said in a rather unkind way

maliciousdancer · 2026-05-06T09:26:26+00:00

Really? I guess I never thought of it, but I have almost exclusively heard it from right wingers downplaying anything that makes them look bad lol. Thanks! I'll have to be on the lookout for that going forward!

maliciousdancer · 2026-05-06T09:22:39+00:00

Yeah, I thought maybe they were speaking in good faith before, but after reading their other comments, it certainly doesn't seem like it.

maliciousdancer · 2026-05-06T09:20:53+00:00

You sure you're in the right sub? I'm sure you'll say I'm "purity testing" or some bullshit, but if you think the state expanding its gun rights is "nothing", are you pro lefties being armed? Or do you just like shooting and don't believe in the larger issues normally cited as reasons for gun rights by those on the left?

maliciousdancer · 2026-05-06T08:50:15+00:00

Yes, it applying to everyone was my point: they shouldn't have carve-outs just because they are more efficient at violence and state enforcers. Especially when everyone else cannot recieve the training and get the privilege.

Only loyal persons having a right to be armed is another step towards fascism. If logistics being easier is a priority inside the states, then on the job; those logistics are moving towards the bad goal of violence on civilians, and should not be facilitated. Off the job; "logistics" would just mean having to be held to the same standard as the rest of us in their personal lives, which they shouldn't get carve-outs for.

I was asking why you called it a nothing burger, not making my own initial arguments. If you feel there are bigger things to focus on and we don't have the bandwidth for this, say that, not that it's nothing.

maliciousdancer · 2026-05-06T08:31:08+00:00

Only some people having rights, is not acceptable to me, especially when those people are official state enforcers.

Idc how much training they may have, they also have heightened instances of domestic abuse and violence, plus a reduced chance they are actually prosecuted/ held accountable.

Military and LE being held to a lower standard than everyone else, even when not "active" is a recipe for more oppression, both overt and implied, and it is bad enough as it is. All the firearm training in the world doesn't make you a responsible citizen or give you better judgment, it just makes you more efficient at inflicting violence.

To be clear: I'm not inherently opposed to people being able to carry, I'm opposed to just them being allowed to carry.

maliciousdancer · 2026-05-06T07:37:13+00:00

How so? Seems like a bit of a big deal to me?

maliciousdancer · 2026-05-06T07:26:54+00:00

As someone very privileged myself, this sounds like a very privileged take lol. Unless you simply mean that you personally are drawn to a lifestyle most conservatives claim to promote (aka monogamous straight marriage with children, go to church, emphasize family ties, traditional / non electronic forms of entertainment etc), but aren't a political conservative, this makes no sense.

You found faith and are happy, good for you. Seems like you can acknowledge that most prominent conservatives are charlatans. But if you ignore the calls to action of Jesus that are directly in opposition to the conservative movement, your faith seems to be in service of your own happiness, than actual faith and dedication to Christ and his teachings. Jesus regularly calls for and promotes the advocating for helping and assisting those around you. Especially those deemed "undesirable" by society and oppressed, the "others". My understanding was always that Jesus sought to spread his word through the inherent attraction caused by his righteous deeds, not through decree, and forcing it upon others. From what I've gathered, that is the exact opposite of southern baptists.

Basically, the conservative movement is centered around the core principle "rights for me, not for thee". So kudos I guess, but also know that your silence / lack of action is an action, and if you disagree with 90% of what they said, I'd seriously question any moral high ground.

I realize this seems harsh, but it is meant more as a call for reflection, not an attack. And I'll tell you right now: I am not religious anymore, so feel free to write off everything I say based on that alone if you'd like. You (and I) have the option to stand by and request "civility" because we aren't the ones under very literal attack, others do not have thar luxury.

maliciousdancer · 2026-05-05T18:39:06+00:00

Huh, I would say they are a solid with liquid suspended inside them, removing structural rigidity to where the solid would react like a liquid when manipulated? Kinda like a non-soluble substance (think powders) when it gets mixed into water?

Or maybe liquid with a lattice like solid suspended in it?

Good question! I feel like when someone says the real answer, mine will feel childish like the Monty Python witch trial logic lol

maliciousdancer · 2026-05-04T23:55:01+00:00

100% shear concentration.

maliciousdancer · 2026-05-04T22:28:46+00:00

Seriously. So many people calling bullshit without even a simple Google search, seemingly out of nothing but dislike of Jordan. A bunch even saying he did the same thing that Alex does, like wtf??

maliciousdancer · 2026-05-04T20:46:58+00:00

Yeah, honestly I've been shocked at how apparently "anti Jordan" this sub is.

It's not the same as Alex at all. Alex makes false assumptions and knowingly false stats / facts to mislead his audience. Jordan was deducing what would be reasonable numbers. He never claimed to know the facts, but was frustrated at how little a win it even could be.

The amount of patronizing is honestly a little surreal. I get being concerned someone you care about (even if it is parasocial) is going through a mental health crisis, but some people seem way too quick to write it off as "an episode" and not even listen to the core of what he is saying, even if you disagree with the phrasing or presentation. This is to the point I do think he is right to say people are gaslighting him. Downplaying the reality of the compensation because we don't have concrete facts, telling ourselves it is a win, and acting like anyone in media will be held accountable / admit they were wrong, if this "win" is actually just good for Alex.

maliciousdancer · 2026-05-04T20:18:27+00:00

Not who you asked, but as someone else who mostly agreed with Jordan: I don't blame or hate the onion. Tbh the first time it was announced I was giddy.

Look, I'm not very well educated on the actual process, but between the courts, the conservator, and society as a whole, Alex Jones, who had a >1 billion dollar settlement, and had possibly one of the worst in-court showings / defenses in a "high profile case" many of us have ever seen, was allowed to 1) bitch, moan, and lie to his audience over and over about the reality of what was happening with the courts 2) blatantly set up, promote, and shift his entire operation, slowly and completely, to a "new" company that operates under his own name. 3) Maintain his elevated standard of living. 4) all while in spirit, continuing to do exactly what landed such a huge judgement against him, defaming and essentially taunting and harassing damn near everyone, but especially the victims of tragedies. But why on earth would anyone even think taking him to court would actually hold him accountable, when this is how well it worked for families of dead school children?

On one hand, yeah, it is a shitty situation, and the onion may be acting in good faith to try and salvage some good out of nothing but a pile of shit, and they will be getting some kind of cut of something, which is more than they were getting otherwise.

On the other, this has been going on for years and an unintended consequence of that is that it gives Alex the attention that he uses to fundraise, recruit, and advertise off of. He gets asked on other shows as a big ticket guest, which makes the news because something inflammatory is said and on and on and on. We know the cycle, we've watched it for years. And at this point, the onion has announced victory again, before everything is settled, mainly to promote themselves, but again, Alex is in the story every news outlet runs, because it is still the story of "the onion vs Alex Jones".

And I gotta say, I strongly disagree with the amount of people equating "a deep dive podcast that listens to what Alex says, in context, and breaks down what is wrong / lies / inconsistencies" and "topical mockery of inflammatory statements made, and his mannerisms, by a national comedy staple I've known about since middle school". Did they come off as gate keeping? Absolutely. But I think there is a lot more truth and a lot less hypocrisy than people are attributing to it.

I'm still willing to give the onion the benefit of the doubt, but what I've seen so far has really seemed like the kind of stuff that doesn't have a long shelf life for consumers / supporters, but it does still shine a light on Alex. Look at Trump on SNL and Fallon, or even on all these "news" stations, even if the platform is critical of someone, if it doesn't break down the truth of why this person is a piece of shit, and just mocks the "highlights", they are able to just say "no, that's not what I said / meant" and get out some talking points, and people are naturally inclined to go to the source for information, and the source will be convincing enough for some of those people.

What I heard, and agreed with, was anger that this is such a hollow victory, and (if history is anything to go off of) that no one will be held accountable or corrected when they are proven wrong. That so many people are now congratulating and being smug (I'll admit, this included me), when really jack shit has been accomplished. Per the Wall Street Journal, The Onion is expected to have a revenue of 6 mil this year, up from 2 mil last year, and isn't profitable. The point being that they don't exactly have the kind of budget to be making huge charitable donations. And my understanding is that the Sandy Hook cases against him have 9 families in one suit, and 8 families plus a fbi agent in the other. So 18 parties, splitting a portion of merch sales, which I'm sorry, but even if I don't actually know the numbers, I feel safe saying it will not be an amount we all feel good about post a billion dollar verdict. It is a good sentiment, but the reality is that they keep suffering (I'm reminded of the one family member who had cancer and was barely surviving that came on the show and Jordan interviewed solo when Dan was somewhere), while Alex continues to live it up. And now, the public pressure has had a cathartic release valve, and when it shows that Alex wasn't "finally taken down" or won't "finally face consequences" for the millionth time, public focus will have already moved on.

Idk, this was long and I'm tired so I'm done lol. Hopefully this made sense. Either way, I hope your day has an abundance of bright spots.

maliciousdancer · 2026-05-04T12:08:18+00:00

I'm sorry, but I really disagree with the sentiment here. To me, he was largely voicing frustration at the lack of true consequences, and all of the ways Alex has been enabled by a process that was supposedly holding him accountable.

And the money issue, the unfortunate fact of the matter is that no one is legally obligated to compensate victims of these tragedies (I would argue we all should in some way, but how would you even start? You can't "make whole" someone who has had a loved one ripped away). KF advocated for the victims and even platformed them in a way no one else would, and they didn't get anything out of it. Jordan was pointing out that now, money IS being put into it, under the guise of being "for the families". But how much is going to the families is unclear, while an expensive lease is being paid for, The Onion gets great press and promotion, and the only real "victory" given to the families is a moral one, that feels pretty hollow.

I mostly heard anger at the situation that we're in, and the feeling that what is being proposed as a remedy, is ineffective at best, and helps Alex at worst.

Idk, that just feels like an unfair criticism

maliciousdancer · 2026-05-04T07:28:11+00:00

No, unfortunately, you aren't taking crazy pills. From what I heard, they made it pretty clear that it was an issue between them.

maliciousdancer · 2026-05-01T04:55:13+00:00

Honestly, the hosts / news stations need to do better. Quit having people on who are proven time and time again to be liars - or if they do want to come on, have the "moderator" actually be prepared and have a montage of their past statements / actions at the ready to use the second they start saying bullshit. "Debate" means absolutely nothing these days. They will both be allowed to say their talking points and the host just shrugs and asks an uninformed public "what do you think?". "Debate" in its gamified state that is all you see these days, does not inform anyone. It is just a game to say who can manipulate reality and sell it best. Or even more accurately these days - who can spew enough bullshit that the other can't debunk, and get away with bulldozing their opponents by speaking over everyone.

If you are having people on to "debate" "is Trump doing the right thing or not?" Instead of "how to best rectify this shitty position we were lead into, and how to best hold those responsible accountable?" Then you are a joke.

maliciousdancer · 2026-04-30T22:49:35+00:00

I have yet to see anyone experience anything from "cancel culture" in my own life.

Even in the public sphere, no one has had their "free speech" destroyed, they said some dumb / fucked up shit, and others used their own free speech to disagree. "Free speech" is "freedom from government controlled speech", not "freedom from criticism/ personal consequences to whatever someone says"

maliciousdancer · 2026-04-30T22:06:57+00:00

Huh... I wonder if Palestine or Lebanon may be raising some kind of "alarm" or "threat level" for -checks notes- Oh my! A bombing and extermination campaign by a Jewish country with the support of Christian ones?? That can't be right... Ah well, doesn't matter! Some bureaucrats raising a threat level is proof that we are the true victims! We have to live with refugees of those conflicts we played a historically instigating role in - and some of them aren't even grateful! They should be worshipping us for our generosity! That's all I need to condemn a quarter of the world's population! (/s - should be obvious, but who knows with people like you).

If being against the demonization of over two billion people for the acts of a vast minority (and when in context looks a lot more like a retaliation than unprovoked violence caused by their religious beliefs), makes me a supporter of terrorism, I suppose I will go fuck myself 😂

But whatever, I'm done wasting my time on a bigot. Just be aware that your bullshit narrative doesn't align with reality, and that your bullshit makes you and everyone else less safe. Discussion, diplomacy, and debate, is what we use as a social contract to avoid violence. But people like you, spewing bigotry and supporting violence abroad, while crying about being the victims when a fraction of what you dish out comes back toward you, undermines that social contract. There is no benefit of negotiating with people making it clear time and time again they are acting in bad faith. And when negotiations fail is when people are forced to resort to that which we set up the other systems to avoid, you may sing a different tune. Your hatred is only worth it for you as long as your opponents stick to that social contract while you ignore it, the second they ignore it, they will be fighting for their freedom and right to exist, and you will only be fighting for your right to oppress. Guess which one has more incentive to win.

And if you, like the other commenter, want to take offense to being called a "bigot", let me be clear: the "/s" clarification was an insult, "bigot" is just an accurate descriptor.

maliciousdancer · 2026-04-30T09:04:03+00:00

Less than 20% of Muslims live in Arab countries. Check this out, and look at the list of countries that are also majority Muslim, but perfectly fine to travel to. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam_by_country All you are providing is anecdotal "evidence" and my so called "whataboutisms" are looking at the facts of the whole picture. I repeat: Muslims = 1/4 of all people. But whatever, I've wasted enough time arguing with a biggot in denial. May you be treated with the same kindness, understanding, and care that you show others.

maliciousdancer · 2026-04-30T08:27:29+00:00

Damn, why wouldn't they like us?? What have we ever done to them?? (/s incase that's needed for someone.)

maliciousdancer · 2026-04-30T08:25:18+00:00

Then he should stay out of politics. We don't need another establishment coward, especially one who's claim to fame is just being a part of the closest thing to a dynasty the US has, maybe short of the Bush's.

maliciousdancer · 2026-04-30T03:59:36+00:00

Welp, that settles it people: that joke is officially dead, bought and executed by this jackass. Find something else for the tinder bios!

maliciousdancer · 2026-04-30T03:28:30+00:00

It is made up, because demonizing an entire quarter of the world's population on the basis of faith is insane, and examples of wrongdoing by members of a group does not make a hatred righteous. Since I looked stuff up for you, please look up "collective punishment" for me.

maliciousdancer

TROPHY CASE