• DayOfDoom [any, any]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    131
    ·
    8 months ago

    kouji71 622 points 3 hours ago
    Look at her post history. He’s been abusive since they started dating when he was 27 and she was 18…

  • RyanGosling [none/use name]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    119
    ·
    edit-2
    8 months ago

    Your first mistake is marrying a soldier

    also

    He adamantly refuses to purchase or place his gun in a gun safe.

    This guy wants to think he’s John Wick but forgot that no one in charge trusts people like him to be armed 24/7, which is why they lock all the weapons up and do inventory before and after issuing them. John Wick was a marine, though, so maybe he’s just living the crayon eating part of the character

    • WeedReference420 [he/him, they/them]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      71
      ·
      8 months ago

      John Wick was a marine

      “People keep asking if I’m going to buy a lifted F-150 with 28% APR and marry a 19 year old I’ve known for a week and I haven’t really had an answer, but yeah, I’m thinking I’m going to buy a lifted F-150 with 28% APR and marry a 19 year old I’ve known for a week.”

    • TechnoUnionTypeBeat [he/him, they/them]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      35
      ·
      8 months ago

      John Wick was a marine

      American media’s obsession with portraying Marines as some kind of elite soldier is fucking hilarious to me after reading Generation Kill and learning they’re just drunk frat boys given guns and told to kill

      They’re possibly the least glamorous soldiers anywhere

      • RyanGosling [none/use name]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        20
        ·
        8 months ago

        You’d think the myth would’ve been shattered after seeing a mentally disturbed trainee becoming the Perfect Marine and shooting his drill sergeant in Full Metal Jacket

    • Coca_Cola_but_Commie [he/him]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      8 months ago

      There’s no way that, in the movie canon, John Wick was a marine. Come on, that’s so lame. It’s revealed in the second movie, I think, that John Wick was born in the USSR, trained from early childhood to be an assassin for the criminal syndicates that control the underworld. They don’t need to say “he’s badass because he was a marine.” John Wick doesn’t need that. Being a marine doesn’t make the character more interesting, it makes him worse.

      I looked it up and found a reddit post that claims one of his tattoos is a latin motto that is popular among marines, and also that the video game payday 2 claims he was one. I’m going to discount payday 2 because I doubt whoever wrote John Wick’s blurb had access to whatever story bible the John Wick team has. As for the tatto, I mean, he is a soldier of fortune, but for the criminal underworld. It’d make sense for him to have a tattoo like that without ever having been in the military.

      Also that reddit post, which speculates that John was discharged from the military for being mentally unstable, has this line: “Of course, John would never get to be a Marine if he had psychological issues before being in the army.”

      Anyway, here’s my impression of Jarhead John being asked how he became the world’s deadliest man:

      “Hey John, is it true you incredible fighting ability is due to the fact that you were fostered by each of the world’s most powerful crime syndicates, trained in their fighting styles, and then spent ten years with the secret, still extant Order of Assassins?”

      “Oh, yeah, that was cool, but most of it came down to being yelled at by a guy in fatigues for a few months and then calling in airstrikes any time we heard a noise.”

          • Wheaties [she/her]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            21
            ·
            8 months ago

            Hm, fair point. I’d just rather maaaybe if vets are showing an interest in our discussions we not immediately name call and wait a bit to see. It’s a past tense description – can’t undo it, can only move forward.

            Plus, name calling is so much more fun when you’re certain it’s deserved sickubus

              • LesbianLiberty [she/her]@hexbear.net
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                24
                ·
                edit-2
                8 months ago

                Yeah, socialist hopes for getting the military on your side have only been successful when the material conditions were overwhelmingly terrible. If a troop or a vet tries to use their status as a troop or vet to make a point beyond possible tactics, if they try to excuse in any way being a stooge for the US Empire, they’re not helpful or useful.

                I know this maybe isn’t “tactical”, but if you were a troop you are irredeemable for your direct role in US Empire and will be going to hell unless you make an effort to genuinely try and help tear it back down. We won’t be winning any troops on our side, might as well venerate the ones who care enough to help anyway.

                Edit: This is however what I’ve gathered personally over time, I’ve not found any convincing literature that supports that troops or vets may help as a force for socialist revolution in the imperial core, and I’ll happily be convinced with evidence or a properly backed piece of theory.

                • Kuori [she/her]@hexbear.net
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  7
                  ·
                  8 months ago

                  I know this maybe isn’t “tactical”, but if you were a troop you are irredeemable for your direct role in US Empire and will be going to hell

                  no “unless” about it. no amount of good deeds can erase the crimes of the past. you cannot “make up” for killing innocent people.

                  not to say someone in that position can’t be useful in some way but they will never reach a point where they’ve fed enough homeless people to somehow overwrite their atrocities or whatever

  • D61 [any]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    59
    ·
    edit-2
    8 months ago

    The two types of military veterans who do this, desk jockeys who feel they have something to prove because they weren’t combat arms and deeply fucked up combat veterans who are broken in the brain.

    I’d say, “she should get a divorce” but the dude would probably try to kill her.

  • Mardoniush [she/her]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    42
    ·
    8 months ago

    Always have a safe, never leave a gun unattended and unlocked for any reason. All guns are loaded, that gun you just visually checked the chamber of is especially loaded.

    • shath [comrade/them]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      34
      ·
      8 months ago

      Never have a safe, always leave a gun unattended and unlocked for no reason. Don’t worry about checking if the gun is loaded, it probably isn’t. If you want to be sure, look down the barrel.

      • SoyViking [he/him]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        15
        ·
        8 months ago

        Roving gangs of Mexican Isis cartels funded by the Chinese KGB are roving every suburb of America. It’s a warzone out there and youl will get killed and eaten if you don’t shoot first.

        You are safest when your gun is as accessible to you as possibly which is why you should never lock it away or keep it hidden. You should always keep it loaded. Let your toddler play with the gun, it builds character and the sooner they get comfortable handling firearms, the sooner they can get their own and help keeping everyone safe.

  • emizeko [they/them]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    38
    ·
    edit-2
    8 months ago

    California makes someone criminally liable for keeping a firearm on his or her premises where he or she knows or reasonably should know a child is likely to gain access to the firearm without the permission of the child’s parent or legal guardian, if the child does gain access and carries the firearm off the premises.

    A person is also criminally liable for keeping a loaded firearm where he or she knows or reasonably should know that a child is likely to gain access to the firearm without the permission of the child’s parent or guardian, if the child actually does gain access to the firearm and either carries it to a public place, brandishes it in a threatening manner, or if someone is injured as a result of the child gaining access to the firearm. The penalty imposed is significantly greater if someone dies or suffers great bodily injury as a result of the child gaining access to the firearm.

    Moreover, a person is criminally liable for keeping any firearm, loaded or unloaded, on his or her premises where he or she knows or reasonably should know a child is likely to gain access to the firearm without the permission of the child’s parent or legal guardian, if the child does gain access to it and carries the firearm to any preschool or school grades K-12 or to any school-sponsored event, activity, or performance.

  • DengistDonnieDarko [he/him]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    26
    ·
    8 months ago

    NTA, the Founding Fathers fought and died so that you could have the freedom to leave loaded handguns around your personal domicile. Leftist authoritarians hate this, of course.