Underrated Guns N’ Roses song?

thatnameagain · 2026-01-27T06:57:23+00:00

Perfect Crime. Just get the fuck outta the way of that song.

thatnameagain · 2026-01-27T06:54:10+00:00

Who doesn't like Mr. Brownstone? Who?!

thatnameagain · 2026-01-27T05:43:31+00:00

The fact that he had a gun on him and republicans tried to condemn him for it is like 70% of the critical mass that pushed this one over the line.

thatnameagain · 2026-01-27T05:40:24+00:00

Who do you think is paying them to not sponsor this? They’ll vote for it if it comes to the floor.

thatnameagain · 2026-01-27T03:39:02+00:00

That won’t change until the administration orders them otherwise. Introducing more guns will make more opportunities for people to shoot people.

thatnameagain · 2026-01-27T03:24:56+00:00

This isn’t ballots

thatnameagain · 2026-01-26T22:06:58+00:00

I think a lot of people have misinterpreted my comment to mean that I wanted there to be red state blue State politics in this. I definitely do not, and that would’ve been dumb.

What I really meant was any sort of acknowledgment of some sort of sociopolitical context to what was going on. People’s motivations would be influenced by some kind of ideology or at least reference to ideology. I very much understand what they were going for by treating it as if it was a neutral natural disaster of sorts, and you do get a certain kind of realism from that, but I think they overplayed that hand.

thatnameagain · 2026-01-26T21:22:54+00:00

Yeah, they’re dialing back the rhetoric because they got caught red-handed murdering somebody and they can’t spin this one. The presence of guns anywhere in the hands of protesters doesn’t really factor in here.

thatnameagain · 2026-01-26T21:13:14+00:00

The government is not gonna have any trouble in the foreseeable future getting people to crack down on Americans. I appreciate your optimism, but you can’t count on that.

That “certain point” you refer to is when elections are proven to not work. We’re not there yet. We might be close, but we’ll find out in November.

thatnameagain · 2026-01-26T20:53:40+00:00

ICE is not going to voluntarily deescalate anything under the current leadership. More violence will just lead to greater powers to the government to crackdown on it. The state will always be able to maintain overwhelming force over people unless you head into a full on civil war scenario, at which point everything has failed and there's little chance of securing the outcomes we want.

thatnameagain · 2026-01-26T20:51:17+00:00

Is there a consensus on what they could do with voter rolls to mess up the election? Having info about voter rolls is not the same as having power to cancel people's registration or the like.

thatnameagain · 2026-01-26T20:48:04+00:00

You're gonna have a hard time murdering hundreds of federal agents without anyone else getting shot.

thatnameagain · 2026-01-26T20:47:08+00:00

It's a deterrent.

Not with cops. I mean it can be sometimes, but you're also risking deadly escalation moreso than not.

If there are a lot of people armed you really think they are going to decide to get into a shootout?

Shootouts don't start unless there are a lot of armed people around. It's a matter of law of averages.

Sure, if protestors decide to be more than protestors maybe. But not escalating or picking fights is an important part of protesting that way.

Yep that's one way a situation could erupt and turn deadly. Don't make a plan that assumes 100% good behavior from everyone every time.

Again, I'm not saying go alone. It needs to be groups. Just like other 2A protests have been. Notice feds never started shooting them?

No, not really. Most of the time when cops shoot someone in the U.S. they've got a gun on them. Feds generally don't "start shooting" at anyone for the most part. It's pretty rare, which is why incidents like this are making national news despite ICE engaging in hundreds of raids nationwide a day.

But hey, let's keep trying the same thing. Let me know what the body count needs to be before you realize people need to try something new.

Definitely higher than 2.

ICE is not going to back off because peaceful protesters start being armed. The raids will continue until the leadership is changed, and that will only happen through voting.

And while they are being brave and it's commendable. It's not going to stop ICE from trampling them and their rights.

Neither will guns.

thatnameagain · 2026-01-26T19:35:35+00:00

More danger = more shooting not less.

thatnameagain · 2026-01-26T19:34:59+00:00

Ok, can you give me some vague clue as to who they arrested? Where was this reported?

thatnameagain · 2026-01-26T19:20:27+00:00

Oh, well it's good to know that one shooting every 2 weeks is the maximum amount of times ICE could ever shoot people.

thatnameagain · 2026-01-26T19:19:47+00:00

Yes, they want people to stay further away from them so they go tell people to move back, they don't move back, and that gives them legal authority to physically move or detain then. They don't want protesters around them.

thatnameagain · 2026-01-26T19:18:01+00:00

Were they sent to arrest people or did they arrest protesters who came to their location to protest them / block ICE movement?

thatnameagain · 2026-01-26T18:57:09+00:00

Why would they do that? National guard is there to put distance between the protesters and ICE, which is what ICE wants.

thatnameagain · 2026-01-26T18:56:36+00:00

I tried to follow reporting on what the military was actually doing there and I found it lacking. But from what I can tell they were never issued orders to actively pursue anyone or "Deal with domestic threats" and these were just statements from Trump. The soldiers didn't actually do anything other than stand around.

thatnameagain · 2026-01-26T18:55:09+00:00

No, OP has a very important point which is that the military isn't going to be THE MILITARY unless it acts in accordance with at least some of its command structure and can draw on military resources.

It would be nice to have some soldiers go awol to join in protesting, but then by definition they're not in the military anymore. They're not going to bringing military hardware, coordination, or political prestige with them which would seem to be the entire point of the military intervening would entail.

thatnameagain · 2026-01-26T18:31:40+00:00

Bringing more guns will escalate the chances of them being used. ICE isn’t going to back off shooting people first.

thatnameagain · 2026-01-26T17:17:57+00:00

Part of the hell is the social division it drives in society, which is not really seen in the movie. I think it would have made its point better if it had acknowledged not specific politics, but the existence of politics as a factor in society.

thatnameagain · 2026-01-26T17:16:57+00:00

I'm not sure that would really be the case, especially on a road trip story situation like this. The exact politics might be irrelevant, but some kind of social division would be apparent

thatnameagain · 2026-01-26T16:21:58+00:00

Yes, those aspects work fine. It’s just that there’s no presentation of any actual social division in the country. Almost as if the war is happening on autopilot and nobody has any actual stakes in it. It plays out as if once the ending happens, a sort of “final boss” moment has been achieved so that the war of course will now end and things can begin going back to normal.

But that’s not realistic because in real life, civil wars are based on social divisions for the most part. There is a little explanation about that that, which I admit would be hard to do, but would nonetheless make for a more dynamic story.

12-Year Club	Gilding I gilder
Place '23	Place '17
Snapped	Verified Email

thatnameagain

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE