Bruce Blakeman, the Nassau County executive, is recruiting “special deputies” to deploy during disaster or unrest. Opponents say the move is dangerous.
Do you know what would really help in emergency? Save more lives? Instead of giving some yahoos a chance to brandish weapons and act out their control fantasies, train concerned citizens with emergency medical, fire and rescue training. Provide vehicles, communication and coordination, to handle evacuations, floods, fires, sudden losses of homes, environmental emergencies to supplement standard emergency personnel when currently the only option is to escalate to National Guard and wait for them to show up.
Imagine if there was arson, being able to help save lives and property, instead of acting out a control fantasy and getting to shoot people
train concerned citizens with emergency medical, fire and rescue training
Nah. Sounds too much like socialism to me.
From the NYTs - what a bunch of lame-ass ragebait.
Paywall
Short answer: Yes
Long answer: Yeeeeeeeeeeeeyfuckthenewyorktimeseeesssssss
Yeah, this is scary, but that’s literally the 2nd amendment
I highly doubt it’ll be well-regulated and used to defend the federal government like the ones the 2a refers to, though…
They’re training them to protect federal infrastructure and they’re still subject to gun regulations. I think it will be a political tool used to oppress the citizenry, so not the spirit of the law, but the letter.
They’re training them to protect federal infrastructure
No matter who’s president? Because fighting off rebellions was a big part of what those militias were used for.
they’re still subject to [current] gun regulations
It’s WELL-regulated, not “barely regulated at all with little to no enforcement to speak of”
No matter who’s president? Because fighting off rebellions was a big part of what those militias were used for.
Ostensibly. They’re obviously lying, but that’s what they say.
It’s WELL-regulated, not “barely regulated at all with little to no enforcement to speak of”
It’s my understanding that the extant gun laws are legally considered to fulfill this requirement, otherwise private gun ownership wouldn’t be possible. Personally I disagree, but I’m not sure what standard would otherwise be used.
I do hope you’re correct, but I don’t trust the US government to adhere to common sense anymore. I guess we’ll see what the court says, because someone’s going to challenge this.
Or maybe he’ll get voted out in November and this will be disbanded before anything happens with it. I think that’s probably the best option, because then it doesn’t get a chance to be approved by this SCOTUS and nobody has to have their civil rights violated by this group.
otherwise private gun ownership wouldn’t be possible
That’s the point right there: it was never about private guns for private use. That’s a fiction (in both the legal sense and the colloquial one) that conservative activist judges on the SCOTUS invented to please the people bribing them.
I do hope you’re correct, but I don’t trust the US government to adhere to common sense anymore
That’s the problem with legal fictions: they don’t have to be correct or even make sense. If people of sufficient authority says it is so, it legally us so 😮💨
I don’t trust the US government to adhere to common sense anymore
Me neither.
Yeah, I was interpreting it under the lens of current legal application, not reality. In reality, it’s a group of people who want to violently oppress their fellow citizens through any means possible.
Holy shit that is disturbing
Isn’t this straight out of the Project 2025 playbook?
Well he seems like a reasonable and kind fellow.
Who just happens to like his scotch and yelling at people.
Depends on their definition of disaster or unrest.
Plane crash or hurricane: Fine.
Losing an election: Not fine.
The posting called the initiative a strategy to assist in the “protection of human life and property during an emergency” such as a hurricane or blackout — and perhaps, Mr. Blakeman later added, “a riot.”
Translation:
“Remember 2020? The next time those uppity n*****s try that shit, we’ll be ready.”
The Kyle Rittenhouse Battalion.
Well I get to cite this same paper twice in two days. We are on the scariest timeline for sure.
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/1354571X.2021.1950340
ABSTRACT
Between 4 November 1925 and 31 October 1926, Tito Zaniboni, Violet Gibson, Gino Lucetti, and Anteo Zamboni all tried and failed to kill Benito Mussolini. The significance of these attempts on Mussolini’s life and their relationship to the establishment of Fascism has gone overlooked as much scholarship focuses almost exclusively on the consequences of socialist deputy Giacomo Matteotti’s murder in June 1924. In this article, I analyse the impact that these assassination attempts had on Mussolini’s construction of the Fascist state. The article asks two main questions: What role did these assassins, and the state of emergency that their acts generated, play in the establishment of Fascist control? And how did they contribute to Mussolini’s cult status and his consecration as a ‘man of providence’? I argue that the failed assassination attempts were instrumental in allowing the Fascist regime to create a state of emergency and to capitalize on a fabricated demand for crisis management. These attempts fundamentally structured the conditions for the regime’s consolidation of power, including a vast expansion of laws that dismantled the liberal state and established the Fascist dictatorship.
That sounds an awful lot like a militia to me.
No, it’s a terrorist group.
Stop calling it militias, they should be called terrorist organizations. We arent living in the 18th century any more, we don’t have militias any more.
I agree that the 75 are part of a terrorist organization, for sure.
The National Guard is a militia though. We don’t often think about it like that but it is. Each state has it’s own and imo as a sidenote, the national guard completely satisfies the 2nd amendment regardless of what the gun nuts today want the 2nd amendment to be.
That’s actually interesting, I thought they were a branch of the armed forces
militias also had a duty to support people in emergencies, but people don’t like to talk about the bill of rights containing duties to one’s neighbors. Militias are almost a socialist concept.
Realistically these people have more in common with Al Quaeda than some kind of 1780s ideal of social solidarity.
We do have state militias still actually, just only a couple and they’re seriously for stuff like hurricane clean up.
they should be called terrorist organizations
Or, at the very least, “Moderate Rebels” depending on how much money the CIA gave them recently.
The militias outlined in the constitution is basically the national guard. These are something else
Yes yes, but what color are their shirts?
They went with brown for some unknown reason
But they call it “desert tan”
I’m confident it’ll be well regulated 😏
