Reichstag Fire Decree (1933)
24 comments
·September 16, 2025Fraterkes
This is a point that's probably very obvious to many Americans, but something I hadn't really considered about the second amendment and the like is that freedom is kind of zero-sum: a consequence of the right to bear arms is that armed guards might have to be stationed at schools, and that cops treat everyone like a potential armed criminal.
This last shooting will probably not lead to a meaningful change in gun-control, but it will create pretexts for this administration to crack down on certain political movements.
dudefeliciano
the idea of the right to bear arms was to overthrow a dictatorial government if need be, not to milsim in city centers or shoot up schools. The 2nd amendment is not really meaningful in the age of palantir and f35s.
padjo
If your “freedom” requires walking around backwards waving a pistol is it really freedom?
bvvgpc
Interesting, what triggered the post now?
hackyhacky
I honestly cannot imagine why someone just now is posting an article about how a singular crime is used as a justification for a massive government power grab and an excuse to oppress the ruling party's political opponents, despite negligible evidence of any connection to the crime. [1]
[1] https://www.nytimes.com/2025/09/15/us/politics/jd-vance-char...
bvvgpc
hadn't seen that news yet, thanks for sharing.
rokkamokka
[flagged]
john-h-k
I don’t think there is yet enough evidence to show the political beliefs of the suspect in either direction. Seems X/Bluesky is awash with certainty that it’s “the other side” but I have not seen any good hard evidence of this
andrewchambers
Hoping for a polymarket bet so this can be resolved.
somedude895
Holy wow, where do you spend your time to arrive at that narrative? I read both right and left wing media to get a balanced view, but I haven't seen anyone that far off the deep end yet. The most reasonable actual fact from this whole thing that I've read is that the guy was terminally online and that's what drove him crazy. Some people could learn from that.
nmeofthestate
>An extremist right-wing citizen murders another slightly less extremist right-wing politician,
It's mind-boggling how successful this messaging has been, considering the facts.
tomp
This is what I return to every time when someone confuses morality and laws.
100% of Hitler's reign was legal. Everything he did was 100% legal.
Morality is and must be above laws.
(Edit: ChatGPT reminds me that Hitler's post-1933 actions were legal; the earlier (and failed) "Beer Hall Putsch" was illegal.)
aredox
Alas, this is the same argument that can be used against the 1st amendment and the political opposition: "Rejoicing in Kirk's death is immoral, therefore the 1st amendment doesn't apply, and let's abusively prosecute anyone we can tie to him in any way".
tomp
No it can’t, you’re literally confusing immoral with illegal in your comment.
dudefeliciano
which is also the excuse many nazis used at the nuremberg trials
bruffen
[flagged]
bruffen
[flagged]
There are still many details yet to come out, and the future is as ever unwritten, but I think a better historical analogue for the killing of Charlie Kirk is Horst Wessel, who Goebbels turned into a martyr for the NSDAP.