Personally, I’ve yet to see a single American successfully use guns to protect any other constitutional right from government infringement.

The Battle of Athens is probably the most uniquely clear-cut example of what you’re asking for, unless we count the American Revolutionary War itself.

Other successful examples mostly involve activists using non-violent protest to push for change, while using firearms to protect themselves from violent reactionaries that would otherwise murder them. Notably, the civil rights movement of the 1950s and 60s. For a modern example, there’s various “John Brown Gun Clubs” and other community defense organizations providing security at LGBTQ events against fascist groups that seek to terrorize event-goers.

It’s also worth noting that resistance is often worthwhile even if it doesn’t result in unqualified victory. For example, the Black Panthers’ armed cop-watching activities saved a lot of Black folks from brutal beatings at the hands of the police, even if the organization was eventually crushed by the federal government.

I have seen lots of examples like Waco and Ruby Ridge, where the government should have tried harder to deescalate, but in the end, everyone died. The closest example I can think of where the government did backoff was the Bundy standoff and all those guys were “defending” was their ability to let their cattle graze illegally on federal land because they didn’t want to pay for access like everyone else.

It sounds like you might be in a bit of a filter-bubble. I don’t mean any offense by this, it’s a normal thing that tends to happen to people. If the news sources you read and the people you talk to don’t mention these things because it doesn’t mesh with their worldview, how would you hear about them?

Strong gun control requires a police state, and it’s advocates are okay with this. Some of them (mostly suburbanites and the like) just imagine that that police state will never be directed against them.

Others are capitalists that actively want to inflict a police state on the rest of us, for their own benefit. It’s a lot easier to break strikes and enforce “work discipline” when the working class is disarmed.

Are there any physical obstructions between the controller and the antenna? That’d reduce the effective range.

Ancaps: Government is bad because tyranny, we should get rid of it.

Also Ancaps: Here’s how we can still enforce copyright, abortion bans, and racial segregation without a government! 🥰

Though also if you plan to appendix carry, it would be good to look into how safe the 1911 is for that. Since it’s an older design, there may be additional concerns about having it pointed at your femoral artery.

I love these memes that turn into threads full of vim tips. You really can do anything within vim. You can even exit vim!: !killall vim

Huh, I’m going to have to try that at some point. It’s even got nim support.

Link for the lazy

I’m able to appendix carry a 4" Springfield XD mod2 without too much trouble. The 1911 seems to have roughly the same dimensions, though maybe a longer barrel depending on which specific one you have. Since I started carrying I’ve switched to wearing slightly larger shirts than before, so that they don’t print and ride up as much. I guess my main concern with carrying a 1911 would be the weight of it, but that’s more a comfort thing than concealability.

Practice is obviously good, but the smaller guns are going to be inherently less accurate than the larger ones. The Ruger might be a good compromise, if you’re not looking to make any further purchases. If you are, then the Sig P365X and Springfield Hellcat, both with red dot sights, might be worth looking into. The RDS makes sight radius no longer a concern, so it narrows the gap between smaller and larger guns.

Interesting. I was thinking more of gray area stuff than outright lying, like playing up the importance of facts that support one’s position and downplaying those that don’t.

I read somewhere a while back that it’s supposedly an evolutionary thing. In a social competition for resource allocation, confidently arguing your position regardless of its correctness is more beneficial than admitting you may be wrong.

It’s probably exacerbated by the internet, where the relative anonymity and psychological disconnection further reduces any benefits to admitting to an error.

From the PR comments:

Maintainers MAY merge incorrect patches from other Contributors with the goals of (a) ending fruitless discussions, (b) capturing toxic patches in the historical record, © engaging with the Contributor on improving their patch quality.

I asked around and asked in the C4 specification matrix room.
And the reason is actually simple. If you merge bad code, have a record of proof in git (pull requests aren’t forever it’s only a github/gitlab thing).

So the idea is if you merge bad code you have proof in the git record that there is a bad actor. You can always revert the commit again or fix it. And the record can act as a proof in case the community want to get rid of bad actors.

Hmm, that seems like not such a good look from Ernest. According to google translate:

I know, honestly it was on purpose. I noticed that forks sync changes immediately with /kbin. I wanted to check how they deal with this much-announced community-based qualitative code review. Answer: they can’t cope. Quite an obvious bug was accepted in PR and domerged into the main branch :P It now works properly on the rifle ;)

Hopefully everyone can play nice and work together productively.

It looks like they’re still working out what they want their process to be:

https://github.com/MbinOrg/mbin/pull/34

Seems like your concern is addressed there:

Pull Requests require at least one (1) other maintainer approval before the PR gets merged (built-in peer review process).

The mbin fork happened when kbin development was looking a lot less active. In any case, it’s not necessarily bad to have a diversity of approaches. Due to their differing organizational structures, mbin will likely tend to have more features and more rapid development, but also potentially more bugs, while kbin remains more stable.

I think especially Lemmy.ml should rather focus more on cleaning up their Tankie & moderator issues

As much as I would love to see it, I don’t think the lead devs of lemmy, who own both lemmy.ml and lemmygrad.ml, are going to ban themselves.

What are you on about? Dessalines said “No, that is full of CSAM.” I would like to know how they came to that conclusion.

or do the .ml admins have a more broad definition of csam?

Their definition seems to be “I don’t like anime”.

OP is lying through their teeth, nothing was found.

Literally any evidence at all beyond “dessalines said so” would be a good start. Hell, even dessalines specifically describing what he saw would be great.

Domain blocking isn’t instance blocking. It’s for if you don’t want to see posts that link to, for example, imgur.com. It’s also broken and will just hide random posts from you.

You’re posting to /c/foss, not /c/freeofchargeandthecodeisavailableforinspection.