Why are left-wing political parties pro-disarmament?

[Davi Meireles]

It seems to be a universal ideology of left-wing political parties that firearms are evil. The bad thing is that criminals have their illegal weapons, and the guy who isn't a criminal is at the mercy of these leftist ideologies that want to disarm the population. I apologize if you are a left-wing American and I don't even want to meddle in US internal affairs! I say this from experience in my own country, where we are unarmed and the criminals are even more armed. Many CACS in Brazil who paid a lot for their weapons are being hunted by the current government. There is already an injunction to make them hand over their AR-15 etc. collector guns.

[Davi Meireles]

Corretion because left-wing political parties are in favor of disarmament.

Please correct the title of this topic moderator

[Test Monsterone]

Davi, Brazil has a unique situation because a large part of the population is considered to be developing. America has a huge impact on developing countries south of its border. For one, the population of America is large, and so it is a big producer and consumer. It produces a lot of firearms that, because of lax regulations and laws, end up trickling down to countries in central and South America through the black market. The other problem is that America has a large drug user population. The demand for all kinds of drugs is extremely high, which incentivizes people in developing countries to fill that demand, for many reasons. Most of the hard drugs in the US come from central and South America, and the islands.

So now you have an abundance of black market guns available to criminals, gangs, cartels, and anyone supplying the demand for drugs. When a country is poor there is corruption, people are more easily bought. These drug organizations are working with billions of American dollars, using their weapons, while the general population gets screwed. The government often can’t compete with these organizations. Politicians are bought. The corruption infiltrates everything.

The problem is multifaceted in Brazil and other countries like it. In Europe there are and have been many developing countries, too, but we never had a mass producer of weapons and a mass consumer of drugs like the US. Drug culture never existed in most of Europe, at least Eastern Europe. Gun culture never existed in basically all of Europe. Everyone serves 2 years in the army, so in case of war, everyone could fire a weapon. My mom was 9 months pregnant with me in the military. But regular civilians just don’t care about guns, it’s not even a thought.

There are maybe 10 or 20 people shot per year in any one of these countries. Crime is way lower than in the US and the other countries south of it. Because there are no guns, there are less opportunities for criminals. Less kidnappings, break ins, rape, random gun violence, etc. Guns by themselves facilitate all sorts of criminal behavior because it gives the criminal a clear and unequivocal advantage over his victim. In a country in Europe, if someone wants to break in your house, they know that they basically have no advantage, or much less of an advantage than if they had a gun. Hand to hand combat is a great deterrent for criminals. Most criminals wouldn’t do the crime if they were on equal playing fields with their victims.

In most of the world, guns just aren’t around, and it’s not an issue at all. A few people who hunt have them, but that’s mostly it. And life in these countries is much safer as a result. So, to answer your question, some people think the world would be better off with no guns because it likely would be. When you add a gun in any situation you raise the stakes. What could have been a verbal argument or confrontation now becomes a life or death situation. What cold have been a creep with perverted ideas now is a serial rapist who kidnaps his victims at gun point. What could have been a disgruntled employee is now a mass shooter.

The thing is that the virus already spread in the Americas. Guns and drugs are prevalent. It’s hard to undo this much, and even with banning guns, there are still millions of unaccounted guns on the streets. So the ante has been upped. The criminals all have guns, so now the general population doesn’t feel safe and needs guns, too. This all could have been prevented if guns weren’t legalized in the first place, but here we are.

[wango]

By left, do you simply mean liberal in general or are you going far left like socialism?

[Davi Meireles]

By left, do you simply mean liberal in general or are you going far left like socialism?

communist left ,Socialist !

[wango]

communist left ,Socialist !

Davi; my question to TM was to clarify his comment, not to make a statement. I’m a little unclear what he means by “left”.

[redz]

I think it’s pretty clear when someone says the left democrats, liberals, socialists, communists.

[wango]

I think it’s pretty clear when someone says the left democrats, liberals, socialists, communists.

Perhaps to yourself, not me. So, I’m asking the OP.

[Test Monsterone]

I think it’s pretty clear when someone says the left democrats, liberals, socialists, communists.

You need an education.

[almostgone]

My eyes are tired. I read left-wing as left-handed and was absolutely lost.

[redz]

You need an education.

Not at all. Seems like if anything you had a little too much indoctrination. Your need to attack me for a simple response is a typical left wing woke type of response. You cannot tolerate those who disagree with your narrative.

[lovbyts]

By left, do you simply mean liberal in general or are you going far left like socialism?

Is there a difference anymore? I know there use to be

[Test Monsterone]

Not at all. Seems like if anything you had a little too much indoctrination. Your need to attack me for a simple response is a typical left wing woke type of response. You cannot tolerate those who disagree with your narrative.

Haha... good one. You call over half the country "communist" and then act like I'm the one attacking you. Meanwhile, I actually grew up in a communist country and my family fought against the communists and are what you now consider communists? Ok then.

[Test Monsterone]

Is there a difference anymore? I know there use to be

Is there a difference between the right and fascists? Who tried to overthrow democracy? And you want to call the left communists, too? That's rich.

[wango]

Is there a difference anymore? I know there use to be

Don’t know where you live or who you know (nor do I want to), but in my excellent neighborhood, we have a spectrum of beliefs that span across the left, center and right. My humble opinion would be to exist in only one part of that political spectrum and to classify others as the same is not ideal and limits one’s ability to make decent judgements and decisions.

[Honkey_Kong]

Is there a difference between the right and fascists? Who tried to overthrow democracy? And you want to call the left communists, too? That's rich.

What rights of the individual citizen are the "right" treading on? Neither side of the false dichotomy are fascist (but they both like to accuse the other of it).

[Honkey_Kong]

My eyes are tired. I read left-wing as left-handed and was absolutely lost.

LOL I'm left handed, but I play guitar, shoot and bat right-handed.

[Test Monsterone]

What rights of the individual citizen are the "right" treading on? Neither side of the false dichotomy are fascist (but they both like to accuse the other of it).

One side didn't try to overthrow a fair election and essentially end democracy as we know it. If it weren't for a few people with a spine and morals, we would be Russia 2.0. That's a big difference between the left and right imo. God forbid facts are spoken, though. I must be an evil leftist communist for just stating the obvious.

[wango]

LOL I'm left handed, but I play guitar, shoot and bat right-handed.

Is that why you think fentanyl is not a problem, is it a left handed thing?

[Honkey_Kong]

One side didn't try to overthrow a fair election and essentially end democracy as we know it. If it weren't for a few people with a spine and morals, we would be Russia 2.0. That's a big difference between the left and right imo. God forbid facts are spoken, though. I must be an evil leftist communist for just stating the obvious.

A fair election? There is no such thing as one. There's plenty of election tampering on both sides and all that mud got thrown around.

Besides those people on january 6th weren't exactly looking to overthrow anything. If they were, they wouldn't have shown up unarmed. They were a bunch of idiots that got all hyped up from Donnie's rally, then had some "agents" that were encouraging them to rush the capital. When they got there, the police removed their baracades and let them in (plenty of videos on Twitter of this happening).

And mind you, I don't participate in voting at all. I think it's stupid and gay. From the selection of the candidates to the manipulation of the morons voting through the media, biased education system and even the culture of the places people work at. Both sides will accuse the other of all the same shit they're guilty of themselves. There really wasn't much difference in the actions of Trump and the actions of Barry or Biden. Their rhetoric was different, but at the end of the day, Donnie did everything the "left" wanted and would say "they forced me to." Depsite having a majority in both houses AND the presidency.

[Honkey_Kong]

Is that why you think fentanyl is not a problem, is it a left handed thing?

I didn't know blaming the addicts themselves for their addiction was a left or a right-handed thing. It's not the drug's fault. It's the people that seek to do drugs. The whole "war on drugs" has been useless and has put many people who shouldn't have ever gone to jail in prison.

But I do understand that private prisons are big-time money operations and prisoners are cheap labor source (whom's cost of living is completely covered by the government). And that's mainly the reason why the drugs are criminalized in the first place. Instead of the less-expensive "drug treatment." that could actually help these people. But hey, if they did that, they wouldn't be able to get these addicts to work for fifty cents an hour (or whatever they're paying prisoners to work now).

[wango]

I didn't know blaming the addicts themselves for their addiction was a left or a right-handed thing. It's not the drug's fault. It's the people that seek to do drugs. The whole "war on drugs" has been useless and has put many people who shouldn't have ever gone to jail in prison.

But I do understand that private prisons are big-time money operations and prisoners are cheap labor source (whom's cost of living is completely covered by the government). And that's mainly the reason why the drugs are criminalized in the first place. Instead of the less-expensive "drug treatment." that could actually help these people. But hey, if they did that, they wouldn't be able to get these addicts to work for fifty cents an hour (or whatever they're paying prisoners to work now).

You sound like you’re soft on crime. I’m not. We pay prisoners?!? Why should we? They should pay for their lodging & living expenses by working. Go back to the days of hard labor, it would be a possible crime deterrent. Damn, these clowns in there, they are getting a bed, shelter, some degree of health care & meals; all paid by the taxes on law abiding citizens hard labor. Plus now they can lounge around all day & hang with their homies. You want decent food or want to watch a tv, work for it, like a decent citizen should! Now you’ve freed up more $ for programs such as mental health issues & drug prevention/treatment instead of boosting taxes (which I have no problem with). Plus extra tax on the wealthiest, it would bring in billions. Why aren’t we doing that (that’s rhetorical so you know)?


Nah, we’re entirely too soft on crime (and drugs). Honestly, the reason I’ve been trying to not to use anything but my prescription for testosterone is I felt hypocritical in using illegal drugs, when I profess tossing the users in jail. And yes, I’m 110% being serious on everything above.

Pay prisoners & Fentanyl is not a problem, lol. Oh, and add voting is stupid & gay. I’m thinking you’re trolling, right?

[Honkey_Kong]

You sound like you’re soft on crime. I’m not. We pay prisoners?!? Why should we? They should pay for their lodging & living expenses by working. Go back to the days of hard labor, it would be a possible crime deterrent. Damn, these clowns in there, they are getting a bed, shelter, some degree of health care & meals; all paid by the taxes on law abiding citizens hard labor. Plus now they can lounge around all day & hang with their homies. You want decent food or want to watch a tv, work for it, like a decent citizen should! Now you’ve freed up more $ for programs such as mental health issues & drug prevention/treatment instead of boosting taxes (which I have no problem with). Plus extra tax on the wealthiest, it would bring in billions. Why aren’t we doing that (that’s rhetorical so you know)?


Nah, we’re entirely too soft on crime (and drugs). Honestly, the reason I’ve been trying to not to use anything but my prescription for testosterone is I felt hypocritical in using illegal drugs, when I profess tossing the users in jail. And yes, I’m 110% being serious on everything above.

Pay prisoners & Fentanyl is not a problem, lol. Oh, and add voting is stupid & gay. I’m thinking you’re trolling, right?

You're on a pro-steroids website, claim to have or currently run gear and you're advocating being hard on drug crime? Are you trolling? And your position doesn't even address the problem. The problem is people want to do drugs. If not fentanyl, it'll be something else.

And the fact that idiots like you vote, proves my point that voting is stupid and gay. And worse, the education system hires you to indoctrinate children.

[teedoff]

Not sure how we went from the left wanting to disarm, to drugs and voting and prisons. Lol

I agree. We are too soft on crime as evident by the the mass smash and grabs in the news daily as well as the habitual drug dealer and abusers continually being let out of prison or rehab time and time again, only to return to their habits and criminal activity.

I dont know what the answer for the addicts are. Maybe longer, harder prison terms would be a deterent. Maybe not. But I don't think rehab is always a better alternative either.

Having some experience with family members, an addict can't be helped. Period. 99% of them anyway. They will only change if they want to change. No amount of talking, begging, and tough love is enough for them to stop killing themselves slowly.

As for the ops question, and unarmed people can't fight back when a corrupt government wants to finally destroy what's left of our republic.

[wango]

You're on a pro-steroids website, claim to have or currently run gear and you're advocating being hard on drug crime? Are you trolling? And your position doesn't even address the problem. The problem is people want to do drugs. If not fentanyl, it'll be something else.

And the fact that idiots like you vote, proves my point that voting is stupid and gay. And worse, the education system hires you to indoctrinate children.

Your reading comprehension needs work.

Hey if you want more meth dealers out there , you’re ok with fentanyl, and you feel we’re NOT too tough on crime & prisoners; I fully endorse you not wanting to vote & thank you for not doing so.