• SpruceBringsteen@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    56
    ·
    2 months ago

    Feel like your chances of seeing one of the dozens of people who hold like half the wealth in the world is pretty slim on the street.

  • Evil_Shrubbery@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    30
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    I don’t think that particular game is hunted on the streets.

    They have meticulously maintained resorts, islands, megayachts, etc for exact purpose.

    It’s no proper sport tho, once the staff stops protecting them, they just stand there sucking their thumbs.

    But it’s still fully worth it, once the kill is done & the empire (for at least a moment) falls, nature can’t believe what just finally happened, etc.

      • Zorsith@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        Fire and smoke are powerful tools. Can’t stay in a bunker forever if you can’t pull air into it.

      • Evil_Shrubbery@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 months ago

        I mean, historically speaking un-tactical raids (pitchforks & torches) worked, however they did buy up a lot more police/military personnel since then.

  • Rhaedas@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    2 months ago

    I just rewatched some Hawkeye episodes. I’m down with this. brb got to make some more special arrows.

  • HelixDab2@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    Why would you us a bow? Range is poor, and lethality is also low, esp. with the access the the ultra-wealthy have to medicine. When you hunt deer with a bow, you can usually expect to have to follow a blood trail, as it’s rarely an instant drop.

    Use a .300 Winchester magnum from 1000 yards; at that distance, you still have about 850 foot-pounds of energy, which is roughly double a 9mm at point black range. With the right ammo, that’s more than enough to get the job done. You probably want a combined mechanical and ammunition accuracy of about .5 MOA range though, so that you have deviation of less than 6" at that range. It’s a challenging shot, but it’s definitely doable if you know your holds and can call the wind.

      • HelixDab2@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        You shouldn’t need to. .300 Win mag is long action, so you’re going to be using a bolt action rifle. There’s not going to be too many contexts where you’re going to want to swap out the scope for anything other than fairly long range.

  • MissJinx@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    I’m not against but I feel like we have to establish boundaries. Like how rich is rich game? Is a weathy dude huntable? What about people that won the lotery? I Imagine billionaires are the better target right?!

  • jmcs@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    2 months ago

    I don’t know. Personally I’m a fan of Piyu style reeducation (or at least a more modern and humane version of it).

  • Routhinator@startrek.website
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    2 months ago

    Now I need to see a photo shop of a Post brand cereal named Nut Clarity, with picture of fuzzy almonds floating in milk.

  • Underwaterbob@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    2 months ago

    I get the violent rhetoric, I really do. But, at the same time, I can’t help but feel like more people would be more amenable to social reform that benefits the little guy to the mere detriment of the rich, rather than murdering them horribly. I could be wrong, but doesn’t history teach us that violent revolution more often just begets more violence than actually solves problems?

    • OurToothbrush@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      2 months ago

      but doesn’t history teach us that violent revolution more often just begets more violence than actually solves problems?

      Nope! Look at the life expectancy increases under socialist countries, they mathematically have less death!

      Also compare red terrors casualty numbers to standard operating casualty numbers. Like 20 million people die of capitalism caused deprivation a year worldwide today.

    • interdimensionalmeme@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      2 months ago

      Ok but the rich, and tgerefore powerful will block said reform or even weaponize it. We’re at 40 years of losses for the little-guy. We’re down to the bone and they’re still cutting while the pigs still feed at the public through

    • pyre@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      counterpoint:

      in all seriousness, no it doesn’t. that’s whitewashing by liberals. good revolutions are often still violent. because guess what, if you want to challenge power, power doesn’t just fucking let you do whatever you want.

      • Underwaterbob@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        power doesn’t just fucking let you do whatever you want.

        No, but power can be subverted. Maybe I’m hopelessly optimistic, but I think there’s still a non-violent solution.

    • dyc3@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      I agree 100%. I’m as left as probably most people here, but I just don’t understand why the first course of action is to claw the opps eyes out.

      • Underwaterbob@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 months ago

        I understand. I throw obscene amounts of money at the cash black hole that is rent. I understand entirely how people think that people who make money simply by sitting on assets they own and otherwise provide nothing to society should be, ahem, obliterated. I just think it’s still possible to obliterate them with regulations instead of actual murder.

    • ericatty@infosec.pub
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      I mean, Kamala is running on policies that would help the little guy. And she might lose to guy who SA’s women and said he could shoot someone in the street.

      If she wins and we get a peaceful transfer of power, then I’ll have more faith in your dream.

      But right now, it seems like violence is what the masses crave over social reform.

  • DarkCloud@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    2 months ago

    Oh, so we let Capitalism destroy the planet and the ability to easily grow crops …and then resort to running around in the heat doing cannibalism?.. do we know they were billionaires at this point, or is there just still enough meat on them to make them worth hunting?

    That’s the problem with post-Capitalist clarity, it leaves you in a really painful situation, and there may be no other destination possible. It nay be the only place Capitalism ends.

    That doesn’t even address whether there’s a market in human meat and wealthy traders… And how Capitalist that market started. Oh Capitalism may not have ended yet in this scenario…