• Drusas
        link
        fedilink
        172 months ago

        Both can be true. But only if you have enough people in either case.

      • @Nalivai@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        22 months ago

        If you want for the police to get an excuse to mow you down with a tank that is. They so wish some of you have guns so they can kill you and have a ready and ironclad excuse

        • @jonne@infosec.pub
          link
          fedilink
          82 months ago

          It’s not like they’re above shooting unarmed protestors. Just compare how cops dealt with cop city with the Bundy occupation.

          • @Nalivai@discuss.tchncs.de
            link
            fedilink
            12 months ago

            But that’s the thing. Shooting unarmed protestors is fucked up even by their standards, they aren’t above it, but they have to hide it and not everyone is having a good time about it, so there is tension and hesitation.
            Shooting armed protestors is why they joined in the first place, it’s what they dream of, it’s everything that a cop ever wanted.
            And a big portion of population that is not OK with the first scenario is also dreaming of the second one.

          • @Nalivai@discuss.tchncs.de
            link
            fedilink
            12 months ago

            One agent in a crowd of unarmed people will not cause that effect. But if everyone is on edge and carrying a gun, then yes, one will be enough to cause full blown massacre.

            • @Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              12 months ago

              One agent in a crowd of unarmed people will not cause that effect.

              It will if police are present and are looking for an excuse to violently quash protest.

              • @Nalivai@discuss.tchncs.de
                link
                fedilink
                12 months ago

                I just want you to recognise the difference between “police mows down a crowd of unarmed protesters” and “police crushed armed insurrection in an intense shootout”.

                • @Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  2
                  edit-2
                  2 months ago

                  It just takes one provocateur to make that difference. The number of actual firearms at the protest doesn’t matter as long as there’s one, which the provocateur can bring.

                  • @Nalivai@discuss.tchncs.de
                    link
                    fedilink
                    01 month ago

                    No, it’s demonstrably not true. Or do you think nobody ever does protest around the world and we can’t study this shit?
                    Hell, there was the exact same situation in Ukraine in 2014, it’s one of the best documented revolutions of the current era. Putin’s cronies tried to do provocaterur shit, and shot back, and there was so much backlash to it from everywhere, this ultimately brought them defeat.
                    I once again want you to recognise the difference between “police mows down a crowd of unarmed protesters” and “police crushed armed insurrection in an intense shootout”, but this time I want you to do it for real, not just knee-jerking canned response.