This is a subverse designed to encourage adult discussion spanning the entirety of the political spectrum. All are welcome, from Libertarians to Authoritarians, Democrats to Republicans, An Caps to Anarchists, Socialists to Fascists to Communists, Green, Blue, Black, White, Purple with Yellow Polka dots, whatever color, persuasion, or affiliation, this is a place for you to post your thoughts, articles, and engage in discussion meant to foster understanding.
Politics is best when we try to avoid personal attacks, limits on discussion, censorship, trolling, shilling, racism, homophobia, antisemitism, or any other forms of bigotry and malfeasance.
Election 2020 Politics Sticky
Politics 2017 Christmas Theme sticky
Nov 2016 sticky on new CSS
This subverse belongs to the community of users. Users are invited to post meta-threads about v/politics and I will gladly sticky them. @flyawayhigh
Use the "Report Spam" link to report spam and someone will review the report. J-mods have the ability to remove duplicate noncommercial spam.
v/politics is for all politics.
v/uspolitics is for US politics only.
v/worldpolitics is for international or non-US politics.
v/politicalnews is dedicated to virtually censor-free politics and news
v/news is for news around the world.
v/usnews is for domestic news only.
view the rest of the comments →
[–] kirkis 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago
I've always been against armed felons, particularly armed robbers, but this makes a good point. Because the 2nd amendment really is about controversial figures like Malcolm X defending themselves.
[–] oowensby ago
I might agree that those that commit violent crime such as rape. armed robbery, or aggravated assault should be restricted; but, what about non-violent felons - should their civil rights be curtailed? If, after completely finishing their sentence, a released felon is too unsafe to allow to vote, qualify for a professional license, or own a gun, how are they safe enough to release into society at all?