o anyone who is against citizens owning "assault weapons"
The 2nd amendment states "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."
The purpose of this was to give the People the power to stand up against the government in case the government turned tyrannical and threatened the People's freedom.
What is the point of the 2nd amendment at all if the People do not have arms somewhat equal to the potential evil government's soldiers that they would be fighting against? I'm pretty sure the founding fathers wouldn't want the People committing suicide missions by trying to fight high capacity medium to long range weapons with low capacity short range weapons. To restrict access to certain arms because they make you uncomfortable would limit the effectiveness of a well regulated militia, and that seems counter to the Constitution to me.
No one disagrees?
Thank God
Murca
>>689748230
Because an assault rifle will help you fight the big bad government and protect you from a drone strike or getting rolled over by tanks.
And if arms are meant to protect from government, why stop at rifles? Why can't I have a hellfire missile?
>>689748230
But the government no longer needs weapons to become tyrannical. The government is never going to round people up and put them into camps or kill them because they need your tax money so they can keep fighting wars that feed the military industrial complex so they in turn become rich.
>>689749202
Because those don't fall under the category of arms.
A simple legal definition of arms would be
Anything that a man wears for his defense, or takes in his hands, or uses in his anger, to cast at or strike at another
>>689748230
Non-stop warfare
>>689749202
You just need a rifles or guns to make an uprising, fighting in the woods, or to get into military barracks and get acces to bigger weaponry like antitank guns whatsoever.
>Vietnam
>Afghanistan
>Syria
>Arab Spring
thats rebellions just with small arms in the first phase
>>689750272
For what ?
>>689749783
Good job googling Websters, but that still doesn't explain why arms stops at semi-automatic rifles and wouldn't cover fully automatic rifles, grenades and rpgs.
>>689749202
That sounds good to someone who doesnt know how to fight. To defeat an enemy you dont have to match them strength for strength. You don't even have to have a superior bodycount. For a force no matter how many tools they have to control a land area, they must occupy that land area. Air superiority is not an occupation but an inconvenience. Armed insurgencies have been proven time and time again very effective against occupying forces. All that is required is to convince the occupying force that its not worth the risk, cost and effort to occupy your location. Drones will never win a war, and soldiers will never become obsolete.
>>689750637
You can get those as well, but they are really expensive and require a lot of paperwork.
>>689750971
Soldiers will absolutely become obsolete when the robot overlords come
>>689750637
I provided an answer to his counter point, don't see a problem there.
As far as grenades and grenade launchers, you can own them as long as you go through the ATF and pay all their fees and shit. They're restricted because of their highly destructive power.
Fully automatic weapons actually aren't illegal on a federal level in the USA.
Certain states do allow them with the proper paperwork and taxes.
I can't wait til technology advances and we have laser guns protected by the 2nd ammendment. Niggas be having sci-fi gang wars and shit.
>>689748230
The concept of a well regulated Militia was all well and good back when everybody was stuck using muskets and such, but you are aware your government have tanks, drone strikes, nukes etc?
>>689748230
The government now possesses cruise missiles, nerve gas, anthrax, and nuclear weapons. The only way a "well-regulated militia" is going to stand up to that is by being rocketed from the doomed planet Krypton as a baby. There is no point to owning automatic weapons except to kill innocent people, since the State is no longer vulnerable to anything short of apocalyptic weaponry.
>>689752113
This. They wouldnt even need to deploy a single army grunt to wipe out every one of them. Just sit in a bunker and enjoy the show.
>>689751291
>>689751558
But if the 2nd amendment is really about protection from government, only mutually assured destruction of nuclear weapons and truly prevent government overreach.
The amendment is way made when the US did not have a standing army, only militias. The founding fathers never intended for there to be a year-round enlisted standing army, especially not the military-industrial complex we have now, they would roll over in their graves.
The amendment is completely outdated, and we already draw the line to say you cant have bombs or missiles, there is no Constitutional reason to say that we could instead put the line at no semi-automatic assault rifles. The only debate is about where the line currently is, not that a line cannot exist because of muh 2nd amendment
>>689751912
>>689752113
see
>>689750971
Also nukes? lol why the fuck would a government use a nuke during a civil war/rebellion? They have to occupy that territory if they win.
>>689749683
This.
>>689752642
What would be the difference between a semi auto rifle and a pistol?
You proposing we go back to single shot everything?
>>689749202
It would be an insurgency, faggot. Nobody is going toe-to-toe with a fucking M1A2 TUSK.
>>689752893
The difference is that as a practical matter some guy in a club would not have been able to shoot 100 people with just a pistol, would've been more like 20-30 even with multiple mags
>>689752671
If the government is crazy enough to start a civil war (seriously, why would they bother at this point?) Then why wouldnt they nuke a medium sized city as a warning to the rest of the rebels? I think they can afford to lose fucking Reno if it meant taking control.
Regulations and background checks are precautionary measures to ensure that you are not a fucking psycho looking for the next person or people to kill for your own personal vendetta. They aren't taking away your guns, they are trying to reduce the ease of emotionally unstable fuckheads acquiring military grade weapons.
>>689753390
Actually he very easily could have shot that many people in a crowded space, depending on the pistol.
>>689753797
governments never cause their own civil wars, the people rising up against the governments do. derp.
>>689754042
Ok. If the government is stupid enough to forcefully try to remove every private owned gun in country by force then. Which is still a retarded idea which they would never risk, even if the space lizard illuminati Jews demanded it or whatever it is people seem to fear.
> well regulated
>>689754042
So why didnt he do it with a pistol then if it could be done 'very easily'.
>>689754629
Maybe he wanted some armor penetrating rounds.
>>689754378
It is a retarded idea and it wouldn't ever be passed to take every firearm ever. Along those lines, they would probably ask for "assault weapons"
Or do what they did with automatics, make it illegal to own any produced/sold past a certain point.
>>689754629
Like many gun owners, he wanted the biggest one possible to make up for his broken, gay penis.
>>689754629
Because people are more scared by a rifle
>>689754626
"Well Regulated" means in good working order and well equipped, it does not just mean restricted. Well equipped would be with weaponry similar to that of the military, but it doesn't have to be exactly as the military has (re: automatic vs semi-automatic) Also, the Militia is the Citizen Soldier....every able bodied person that can take up arms, historically being as young as 13 and as old as a person can lift the weapon and fire it.
>>689753826
Then enforce the laws currently on the books.
We don't need a new system, we need to fix our current broken one.
>>689752880
for the sake of argument, tyrannical meant against its own people, not tyrannical against foreign countries that it fights.
>>689751912
One of the main reasons given why Japan did not invade the US during World War 2 was because they knew the civilians were also armed and they would have to fight not just the arms but also the populace. The militia is for the defense of the country, not just to fight your own government. The 2nd Amendment puts the citizens on a level playing field with a tyrannical government or governmental officials as spelled out by the founding fathers who some insisted on having it in order to ratify the Constitution. The British also tried to remove all weapons form its citizens before the Revolution. That didn't work out to well for them either.
>>689756211
Would you say that background checks should be necessary for purchasing these types of weapons?
>>689756605
>One of the main reasons given why Japan did not invade the US during World War 2 was because they knew the civilians were also armed and they would have to fight not just the arms but also the populace.
Did Japan even have a navy capable of mounting an invading force of any real numbers?
>>689757069
They tried at the Aleutians but were repelled, and yes they did. At the time of Pearl Harbor, they were unstoppable but when we bombed Tokyo a few months later with Doolittle's Raiders, mostly symbolic to show we can hit them at home, they did not fully deploy to their fullest extent but kept forces in check to defend their homeland and the islands they had already conquered from further raids and invasions. That gave us the time to rebuild our Pacific Fleet, re-arm and take the fight to them instead of them coming in to San Francisco Bay.
>>689748230
The point of the "well regulated milita" was to catch escaping blacks, not to stand up against the government. Moron.
>>689748230
My biggest question about this. "Fight against a tyrannical government" bullshit is that. How is some government official going to tell some rosy cheeked farm boy fresh from basic to go shoot at their fellow Americans. It's just not going to happen.
>>689758971
Its happened in other countries and in the US already. So your point is invalid. Kent State is a relatively recent examply
>>689758971
By labeling their "fellow Americans" as traitors.
Since the military swears an oath to defend America from threats foreign and domestic, and a large group of people trying to rebel against/overthrow the government is a domestic threat, that boy would have no choice.
>>689758971
It may not happen now but it did during the Whiskey Rebellion. Civilians didn't like the taxes on whiskey and revolted until Pres. Washington sent in troops to stop it. Tyrannical means different things to different people. I am sure the farmers then thought Washington was tyrannical for imposing a tax on whiskey. Also, you have to keep it in historical fact. During the Revolution, the King of England was seen as a Tyrannical Government, (taxation without representation and the attempted confiscation of firearms) so the Founders wanted to make sure that its citizens did not have to go through the same thing they did. But, I believe it was Jefferson, who said it was not only our right, but our duty, to stand against laws that are unjust (paraphrasing). It is more to keep the government in check because of the possibility, it doesn't have to be a reality. However, even in today's society, if a person is not given the opportunity to defend themselves, whether against a government or against the criminal element, then they are either victim's or future victims. Also, just in today's news, you have several supposedly prominent General's wanting more gun control and banning AR15's. The index finger pulls the trigger, why not just ban having an index finger? There are a lot more "rosy cheeked farm boy fresh from basic" that are more sheep than Patriotic soldier. thanks to the public education system, they can't seem to think for themselves a lot of times, and common sense has been replaced by common core.
>>689758521
Really? Must be Common Core Edumacated
>>689759215
Okay so third world countries don't count.
Also the Kent state shooting was shooting at rioting people. Not a Well Regulated Militia. And the only thing that a well regulated militia would've accomplished in the Kent state massacre would be a larger massacre. If something was big enough to actually require a well regulated militia than its a civil war in which half the army splits to take sides.
>>689749783
I think I could cast a hell fire missile in anger but hey that's just me
>>689749202
>Let's level an entire suburban street to kill a guy with an AR15
Sound logic there m8, great way to get people on your side
And you're assuming soldiers would willingly fire on their neighbors. Most of them are gun owners themselves and value people's rights, and would defect to the rebellion
>>689749202
Tell that to the vietcong or the Taliban.
>Insurgent has rifle
>Insurgents ambush and kills squad of soldiers
>Now habe better weapons
>>689748230
Everyone already knows this.
>>689761442
Open Borders comes to mind for justifying a Well Regulated (equipped) militia if the Federal Government refuses to protect the United States, its up to it's citizens.
>>689748230
>The purpose of this was to give the People the power to stand up against the government in case the government turned tyrannical and threatened the People's freedom.
Bullshit. The government wanted the people to stand up to the government? In your dreams, pal.
>>689761956
Personally I would love to watch ISIS smuggle an automatic rifle into America . It'd be a comedy.
>>689762379
Why would they bother? They can just buy or steal one here.
>>689762180
Remember, the Founding Father's were not the Government yet, they were still citizens of a new country without a centralized government. They didn't want their children or grand children to have to go through what they had just gone through in the future. You might want to read up on some history books prior to 1950-60 and the Federalist Papers. Throw in some personal writing by Jefferson and Madison as well. It might turn your world upside down....pal
>>689752113
>anthrax, and nuclear weapons
Yes, the US government will launch nukes in its own country, destroy its own infrastructure and release anthrax spores for all of us to enjoy.
>no point, no need to own
Well, it's my right.
>>689761882
Apparently not judging by how long this thread has stayed alive.
>>689762567
Not if there is no assault rifles you fucking cuck.
>>689763024
Assault rifles have been highly controlled and expensive in America for decades retard
>>689749783
By that logic, arms - as defined at the point the amendment was enacted - would be muskets and nothing more.
>>689748230
"a·mend·ment
əˈmen(d)mənt/Submit
noun
a minor change in a document."
>word literally means changing shit
>has already been changed over a dozen times
>>689763156
Yet can still be stolen. Anything can be stolen. Pal.
>>689761442
Kent State were not rioting when ordered to disperse, only became violent after the dispersal order. After another dispersal order later on and teargas use, the NG fixed bayonets onto their rifles and pushed on the Unarmed Protesters. Then the Sgt turned and fired on the crowd with his 1911, and the other guardsmen followed suit.
Plus there's all of these situations, and more
Shay's Rebellion
Bonus Army
Whiskey Rebellion
Battle of Athens
Haymarket Affair (Police fired on protesters as they were dispersing)
Homestead Strike
Battle of Blair Mountain.
>>689762180
It is written into our Deceleration Of Independence
"That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. "
>>689762567
Semi Auto, yes. Full Auto are obtainable, just very controlled. It's been that way since 1986 I believe?
>>689763244
But by saying arms instead of muskets, it keeps whatever arms means relevant to the times.
If they wanted us to just have muskets they would have said muskets, they used the unspecified term that is relevant throughout the ages for a reason.
>>689763156
Yes but banning assault rifles would make getting one incredibly hard. And before "muh black market." It cost 43,000 dollars to buy a gun on the black market. A bit expensive to plan an attack huh.
>>689763290
What's your point here?
>>689763244
And the first amendment would not apply to television and the internet since they weren't around then
But thankfully, the founding fathers looked ahead and knew things would advance as time went on, so they didn't add any qualifiers to the amendments like "muskets"
>>689762649
Yes. If it was written down it must be true, N'est-ce pas?
>>689763244
>would be muskets and nothing more
Then I guess the 1st amendment only really applies to speech and written letters, etc. Not the internet or things like that.
>>689763290
Yeah so what if it's a fucking amendment it's still in the god damn constitution. Unless you want the states to all get together and agree to amend it then you're gonna have to fucking deal with it you commie motherfucker.
>>689748230
in your hypothetical situation the government has drones and tanks.. youd lose regardless this argument is stupid no private individual needs an assault weapon
>>689763728
I mean the point of it, is to change with the needs of the people, it's kind of the point.
>>689763363
Literally has never happened
>>689763525
They are essentially banned, and lawfully owned full auto weapons have never been used in a crime
Rifles in general, are not a problem
>>689763244
There's lots more. They had shotguns, rifles, pistols too, not just muskets. The modern firearm at the time was the musket (military weapon) or the rifle, mostly used by hunters because of their accuracy (and by Gen. Daniel Morgan and his men of sharpshooters for the American Militia). Arms was meaning modern weapons, not antiques.
>>689763728
They should ban alcohol while they're at it.
>>689748230
> Being american
> Being free citizen
Choose one
long rifles and even Semi-auto rifles do fing everywhere else in the world stfu dumb cunt americans, or do you like your children being killed? :P
>>689763290
So get 66% of Congress together to repeal the 2nd amendment
>>689763932
>Literally has never happened
Can does not mean did. Learn to read.
>>689763688
My reference was written down before the internet so most of it was true. Forget the history books then, just read what was actually written by the Founding Father's. But I understand, education can be scary to the uneducated.
>>689763904
What the US needs is better funding for mental health programs and better recognition of mental health problems. It's like in school when the teacher punished everyone because of the poor actions of a few. It pissed everyone off and didn't really solve anything.
If you bring up Canada the differences between us are more than just more restrictive weapons laws. Canadian's don't have the same kind of vigilante mentality that America does. It's a cultural difference rather than just access to weapons.
https://youtu.be/ZT4pGp1mQqE
>>689750470
To overthrow the government, fucktarx
>>689764368
What's your point? We should ban anything remotely dangerous because it could potentially be used in a crime?
C'mon you can't be this dense
>>689764369
Your trust in "The Founding Fathers" is very touching. They must have been wonderful people.
>>689763525
>It cost 43,000 dollars to buy a gun on the black market
>It cost 43,000 dollars
>43,000 dollars
>43,000
WEWWWWW. SAUCE????? HAHAHAHA
>>689764701
For the most part yes. You are exercising one of the rights they guaranteed you right here. You know, the one right before the 2nd Amendment? You should be thankful.
>>689764270
so edgy
>>689764698
I've heard this argument 40 years ago. Still waging, I see.
There's no real need for a dipshit to own an assault weapon though. And your guns won't do much against a swat team or drone anyway.
If for some reason an assault weapon was in the hands of someone that actually needed it, sure.
But many standard guns are fine to defend against most.
9/10. Times though. Nobody seems to use a gun to defend anyway
>>689748230
It is too late, the second amendment has failed.
welcome to the nannies states of murrica
>>689763525
>43,000 dollars for a gun on the black market
I'm being memed aren't I
>>689763932
Any gun can be stolen.
Assault Rifles Stolen From Massachusetts Armory
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/11/15/assault-rifles-stolen-from-massachusetts-army-reserve-armory.html
>>689748230
>the right of the people to keep and bear Arms
>bear Arms
Where does it say assault weapons? Fully automatic weapons have been banned for years and the ban has been upheld as Constitutional. There's no reason they can't also ban semi-automatic rifles under the same precedent. The only reason they haven't is strong lobbying and fear of backlash come re-election season. If the public will has shifted, it can and will change.
>>689765002
Posting on an anonymous site from anywhere in the world?
>>689765221
>9/10. Times though. Nobody seems to use a gun to defend anyway
And since when has "need" ever had anything to do with it?
http://www.buzzfeed.com/ryanhatesthis/10-potential-mass-shootings-that-were-stopped-by-someone-wit#.ew1w5ybKx
http://countercurrentnews.com/2015/07/no-cops-around-man-with-concealed-carry-permit-stops/
http://myfox8.com/2015/07/27/woman-saved-lives-by-shooting-possible-serial-killer-in-the-head-police-say/
http://www.thefederalistpapers.org/uncategorized/uber-driver-with-conceal-carry-permit-stops-mass-shooting-in-chicago
http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2015/07/25/women-who-shot-alleged-attacker-may-have-slain-a-serial-killer-police-say/
https://www.gunowners.org/sk0802htm.htm
http://www.kgw.com/story/news/2014/07/24/12405148/
http://controversialtimes.com/issues/constitutional-rights/12-times-mass-shootings-were-stopped-by-good-guys-with-guns/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=epZod2qyyN4
http://100percentfedup.com/watch-angry-school-shooter-is-stopped-by-brave-woman-with-gun-media-ignored-story/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curtis_Culwell_Center_attack
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2015/10/03/do-civilians-with-guns-ever-stop-mass-shootings/
http://www.frontpagemag.com/point/170254/how-assistant-principal-gun-stopped-school-shooter-daniel-greenfield
http://www.businessinsider.com/uber-driver-with-concealed-handgun-prevents-mass-shooting-in-chicago-2015-4
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parker_Middle_School_dance_shooting
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appalachian_School_of_Law_shooting
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2007_Colorado_YWAM_and_New_Life_shootings
http://www.foxcarolina.com/story/17251517/churchgoers-subdue-gunman-at-spartanburg-church
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clackamas_Town_Center_shooting
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pearl_High_School_shooting
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trolley_Square_shooting
>>689748230
>"A well regulated Militia"
>regulated
>Mass shootings
Kikes on trikes OP you really are a fucking goof.
>>689765370
So what do you want to do? Ban them from the Army? Retard
>>689765384
They aren't banned, just harder to get.Takes a Class 3 license.
>>689765716
No one said that. Projecting much?
>>689765526
Wow, good comeback.I'm impressed. Must have lost.
>>689765370
Stolen=/=used in a crime
>>689748230
i believe that there is a proper amount that i would consider normal like two of each type of gun say like shotgun, hunting rifle, hunting pistol, concealed pistol, and "assault" rifle
>>689748230
There are no fucking well regulated Militias any more, and even if there were, this does not given average citizens the right to bear arms, only those Militias. Further, fuck you, your gun is not going to do shit if the government took over, not as if you'd have any chance anyway.
Yup, because selling Omar Mateen was helping to support a well regulated militia...
>>689765986
And who are you to define what is normal?
Many people have dozens and dozens of firearms because they like to collect them
>>689766291
Because your population are a bunch of mongoloid robococks and get upset because someone wants to stop you owning guns that are impractical.
But that's none of my business.
>>689766258
>>689766291
i didnt say it should be regulated in any manner just my thoughts about it and i definitely think everyone should stock way the fuck up on ammo
i also understand the collectors but as far as what i consider regular would be something like that we shouldnt ever be regulated on it considering the more shit that goes on every damn day and my state just wnt to constitutional carry and i carry all the time
>>689766145
US law states that every able bodied male age 18-45 is in the militia, and the Supreme Court has stated that the individual has the right to own guns, not just the militia
And you seen weirdly OK with having a super powerful authoritarian government who is capable of destroying all it's citizens at a whim
I firmly believe the people should be in control of the government
>>689765795
Exactly. The same reason we don't have rocket launchers and heavy artillery in our backyards. The law distinguishes between the types of weapons and it could be argued that "Arms" could be any weapon... as in, as long as you can still carry a knife, they can just ban guns outright and you'd be able to "bear Arms" or whatever. It's a terrible amendment and really needs to be updated for clarity rather than the bullshit we have to deal with now.
>>689766556
Define impractical
>>689766145
>this does not given average citizens the right to bear arms, only those Militias.
If you are born in the US or you were naturalised, you are part of the militia
>>689766556
>owning guns that are impractical.
It isn't about practicality. It's about right.
>>689763471
Dispersal order that was deemed constitutional.
Firing the was deemed unnecessary- unneeded- excessive
>unnecessary-unneeded-excessive
Reports also say they were afraid for their lives.
I'm just going to point out what I said earlier. This was a group of angry students assualting a group of soldiers. The group that was rebelling was covering a topic that many Americans agreed with. A Well Regulated Militia would only end in death and prove nothing about the bonuses of owning a gun.
Plus the real situation that a Well Regulated Militia would be needed is if a militant tyrannical government was oppressing the American people. The problem with that is to oppress us the need a military and I don't think that the soldiers are going to oppress themselves.
Hypothetical. The US government just passes a law that lets the do unwarranted search and seizures. Riots are sure to happen in major cities. NG goes into instill marshal law. This causes Widespread riots every large city is now rioting. The military now has to oppress their own families. Let's see how long that lasts.
Let's bring guns into this. People starts shooting at these riots. Military now has a strong clear enemy. Death rate skyrockets as Americans shoot each other. Actual Civil war. Ect.
>>689766755
>heavy artillery in our backyards
Lel, there's a guy in my town that has tanks, Howitzers and other military equipment
If you have the money, you can own them. There's a rich guy in the UK that privately owns a Fokker fighter jet
Let us at least agree guns are dangerous. Would you agree? If they weren't they would be of little value. Now let us notice that dangerous things tend to be regulated. Sometimes not way back then but now. Like dynamite. Cocaine. Heroin. Radium. Do you see where I'm going with this?
>>689748230
something that is made to kill lots of people over short time should not be available to everyone
>>689766816
But lets be honest, the 2nd amendment was from 17XX not 2016 I highly doubt the founding fathers knew about .50 calibre snipers and really stupid stuff now a handgun semi-rifle, that's fine but why would someone need to own something like an SMG or a full auto AR.
>>689766788
Anything that isn't a hand gun or hunting rifle, hell the original amendment was when muskets and flintlock weapons and shit was a thing now ARs and high powered rifles.
>>689766988
checkd
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Art_Nalls
>>689748230
Weapons were very different in the 1700s. The people had basically the same weapons as the government.
Today is very different. Do you really think an AR-15 is going to win a war against people who have the nuclear launch codes? No matter how you look at it, owning an assault weapon is completely pointless.
>>689767131
>Let us at least agree guns are dangerous. Would you agree?
In the hands of morons, everything is dangerous.
>>689767131
>Like dynamite. Cocaine. Heroin. Radium. Do you see where I'm going with this?
Cocaine and heroin are only bad and can't be used for self-defense, fuckwit.
no, I don't see where you're going with that. Nice try, though
>>689767306
they arent available to everyone as it is.
ffs, get your news from somewhere other than MSNBC and CNN
>>689767131
>Let us at least agree guns are dangerous
Not if proper safety procedures are followed
But they are deadly, which is why they make such good tools to stop someone from attacking you. And people have the right to use the best tools at their disposal to defend themselves
And none of those other things you mentioned are a protected right
>>689766988
Sure, but you still see my point right? The vagueness of the law makes these restrictions possible.
>>689764862
Eh my bad heard a comedian say it was like. "I could see it." It's actually $15,000 as of 2014.
http://www.ibtimes.com.au/cost-illegal-firearms-australia-has-skyrocketed-criminals-now-do-gun-sharing-1378871
>>689767306
>Anything that isn't a hand gun or hunting rifle
You can hunt with anything, including ARs like my pic
>>689767359
>hell the original amendment was when muskets and flintlock weapons and shit was a thing now ARs and high powered rifles
Actually it has nothing to do with the type of weapon, it just says "Arms", which means what the modern infantry soldier has
>>689767306
so what about automobiles?
>>689767520
Cocaine and Heroin were legal drugs at one point, available over the counter at your favorite drug store. (Or in your favorite beverage for that matter.) Now they're not. Times change. Nothing is forever.
>>689767552
>Not if proper safety procedures are followed
Criminals don't follow your rules, but you still allow them to have guns.
>>689767427
>>689750637
It actually doesn't, you can own full-auto rifles and rpg's you just need to pay the government a tax and go though a lot of background checks etc
>>689767690
Except 'arms' means what modern infantry soldiers carry
And "Shall not be infringed" is not vague
>>689748230
Citizens should have equal weapons as the government so you talk about guns? Bitch, your guns are useless against a fully loaded B-2 bomber. go ahead and start a revolution with your guns. See how far that gets you.
>>689767552
Again, you only have the right to "bear Arms" and it does not not mention assault weapons.
>>689768016
>but you still allow them to have guns
No we don't, it's illegal for criminals to have weapons
Where do you people come up with this shit?
>>689768226
It doesn't mention muskets either
And see
>>689768162
>>689767903
>Cocaine and Heroin were legal drugs at one point
Yeah, and the ability to use them wasn't directly protected by an amendment in the Bill of Rights like gun ownership is
Secondly, the war on drugs has failed. People STILL use these drugs, sell these drugs, and it gives cartels power
Guns can still be used for self defense, which those drugs can't. It's not even related
You have no point
>>689768063
What are you trying to say? Both are equally useless against air to surface missiles.
>>689768100
>checkd
>>689768251
because criminals never break the law
and law enforcement are such great marksmen
>>689768162
>And "Shall not be infringed" is not vague
It's a law. Laws can change. Think you have "rights"? Ask the Japanese-American citizens about their "rights" in 1942.
>>689748230
We have to defend ourselves from the British, the Chinese, and other Americans.
>>689767839
Even if there was civil unrest within the US the government would fucking ruin you, so that really doesn't help when you 'fight the power'. Even if it means any firm arm it's not going to stop some closeted faggot shooting other faggots in some queer bar in Florida because obviously the second amendment played a vital role in that and many other shootings.
>>689768063
For a single shot, maybe. But if a 5-round bolt-action were as deadly as a semi-auto with a 20- round magazine, why isn't the military still using the bolt-action?
>>689768498
Why do you think we are fighting so hard no to have the laws changed and our rights taken away?
>>689767359
>I highly doubt the founding fathers knew about .50 calibre snipers and really stupid stuff now a handgun semi-rifle
You trying to say they had no grasp on tech advancement? The founding fathers weren't retarded. I'm sure they could conceive new weapons being developed
>need
It's not a need. Stop saying it's a need. It's a right. Period.
>>689768498
1942 was a toadally different time and global climate
ask takei about it, he was in the camps, he aint butthurt
does anyone else here live in a state with constitutional carry if so how has it helped or hurt?[
>>689767465
Its not a paper clip, its a paper magazine.
>>689768550
The 2nd amendment does not give people the right to commit crimes with weapons
And places who don't have a 2nd amendment, and who have very strict gun laws, also have shootings. America is not the only country with guns or shootings
Not to mention the Florida bar was a gun free zone since Florida bans guns at establishments who serve alcohol
>>689768696
But they couldn't conceive the fact that the modern US is a writhing pit of autism and Aspberger kin.
>>689768887
helped. almost daily thee are news stories about how firearms have stopped criminal activity (not in the hands of LEO, i might add). mind you, those stories don't get legs for obvious reasons
>>689768887
Vermont was the first state with constitutional carry, and it has one of the lowest crime rates in the nation
Also, it's mostly criminal nigger gangs doing the shootings, not white people
>>689769143
I liked the one about the moron at Wal-marts shooting at some "shoplifters"
>>689768353
Exactly, it's a bad law open to interpretation. It doesn't guarantee the right to carry any weapon you want in any way, just the right to "bear Arms" as interpreted and defined by the governing legislative body and judiciary. If they pass a law that says the definition of Arms = sharp sticks, all your guns are gone.
>>689769143
yea because that wouldnt help the cause to ban anything but i live a state where permitless carry is legal but only here recently happened so nothing as of yet has come of it
>>689769340
>criminal nigger gangs
Lots of criminal nigger gangs in Vermont, are there?
>>689768774
>constitution was written in a different time. Doesn't matter.
>japs were held against their will in 1942, stupid argument because it's a different time.
Double standards?
>>689769340
well i was just curious as to how its done in other states
>>689769413
no you silly pole fancy
more like this
> http://thegrio.com/2015/08/21/teen-boy-saves-siblings-home-invasion/
A North Las Vegas teenager is being credited with saving his younger siblings when home invaders attempted to break-in.
Fourteen-year-old Andrew Mason was home with his younger brother and sister, both 6, when two men gained entry to his family’s home, and the young man knew how to handle the situation.
“I went upstairs and grabbed my brother and told him to hide in the closet. I grabbed a cell phone off my dad’s dresser, grabbed my rifle and hid in the closet with my brother,” Mason told KVVU-TV.
Mason’s father, Kiewa Mason, told the local Fox affiliate he and his family have practiced a break-in scenario.
“I believe in the right to bear arms, and it’s not like he was foreign to it,” Kiewa Mason said. “We go to the shooting range quite often.”
When the home invaders opened the closet Andrew was in, he said they took off as soon as he pointed the gun at them.
“He’s excellent. He did everything perfectly. [He] couldn’t have done better, and he’s actually a hero,” the proud father said.
>>689769079
The fact that Florida HAD to ban guns on a premises with alcohol explains a lot about it.
It might not be the only country by for the love of fuck it's abyssal for gun regulation, you can go on some gun site, find a person near you with a pistol for something like $100< and meet up pay this person and then fuck off back home, that's the worst way to do it, maybe if they had some insurance type stuff where you got a certificate that you needed to re-register by phone so that by serial code it can be tracked to the owner so if the gun is found it can be claimed as lost or stolen by some nog thus prevents you shady cunt from slinging guns like it's nobodies business.
>>689769445
>If they pass a law that says the definition of Arms = sharp sticks, all your guns are gone
Yeah that won't happen
>Arms
>Weapons and ammunition; armaments
http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/us/definition/american_english/arms
>>689769593
No, that's the point
>>689769777
wasted
god your a cunt
>>689769865
Lots or non-gang niggers in Vermont?
>>689766988
Yeah but you have to cement off the main cannons in order to own tanks.
I suppose you can drive through walls or something but you can do that in a lot of vehicles.
>>689767719
>Australia
>2014
>comedian
OY VEY
>>689769777
>The fact that Florida HAD to ban guns on a premises with alcohol explains a lot about it
Uh, most states do that. It's some of the "common sense" gun legislation that I happen to agree with
And do you really think criminals are going to go through all that bullshit? Who's going to make them?
>>689769079
>And places who don't have a 2nd amendment, and who have very strict gun laws, also have shootings. America is not the only country with guns or shootings
The number of shootings is the difference. Is disproportionately high here and the CDC isn't even allowed to study it to give us useful statistics into the cuase and effects of various regulations.
>Not to mention the Florida bar was a gun free zone since Florida bans guns at establishments who serve alcohol
You're (intentionally?) misunderstanding the purpose behind gun free zones. It's not to directly prevent people from bringing guns into an area, it's to allow additional charges against people who break the law using a gun in those areas, or are caught with guns before committing a violent crime.
>>689767719
easier than gun sharing?
make your own guns....
>www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/GUIC.PDF
>>689769777
Yeah thats a pretty serious felony. Sure you can probably find someone to do it, you can probably find someone to drive you to a bank robbery too, but its not exactly like a highschool kid asking joe cool to buy him a six pack
>>689769825
>Yeah that won't happen
That's the problem with laws... they can be changed. You say that now but if enough people get behind it, it will.
trust me on this one if your in a gun free with a concealed carry and you save a bunch of lives by having it at least here in wv the establishment will not charge you and will sometimes even back you up in court for being a dogooder
>>689770296
>it's to allow additional charges against people who break the law using a gun in those areas
Pretty sure murder is murder and that's enough to charge and convict someone
And why do you think disarming law abiding people is a good way to stop criminals?
>>689770483
>You say that now but if enough people get behind it, it will
Good thing America isn't cucked like Britain or Australia
>>689748230
Nice honeypot, FBI
>>689748230
i don't think you shouldn't be allowed to own guns, i'm british and you can still own guns here, its just really hard
you guys need to curtail the supply, start shutting down gun stores so theres maybe one in every state, making it harder to own guns will allow you to slowly phase them out of the culture while still allowing hobbyists and collectors and such to own them.
Implying you can stop the goverment in this fantasy world you live in do you think people would orginize and fight together? Look at new orleans during the hurricanes, you would have zero orginization people killing each other and it will plumpet us into a 3rd world country.
>>689768643
They are. Herd of snipers brosniff?
>>689748230
Considering that owning a gun is not a right.. but instead a luxury.
>>689748230
agree 100% OP
>>689768887
>does anyone else here live in a state with constitutional carry if so how has it helped or hurt?
>>689748230
The 2nd amendment also states that OP is a fag.
Come take our guns.
Our right to bear and arm.
Come take the nuns.
Sister will sure do harm.
Come take our word.
We'll just use newspeak.
Tell us what we heard.
It'll be 1984 by week.
Come take our eyes.
Will beleive what you say we saw.
Come take our our prize.
Suffocate it with more law.
Tell us that were free.
Then make us defenseless.
Terrorist shooting me.
Will make me glad that we are fenceless.
Come take the flags.
Its we the people's fault?
Some "jihadi" shot some fags?
In a gun free "vault"?
>>689770841
No one cares what you think. Go back to your shit country
We don't "need" to do any of that. Now go prep your wife's bull
>>689768365
>You have no point
Shit that gets abused gets banned or regulated.
Try to buy some god damned sudafed these days. Or maybe some fertilizer and nitromethane.
>>689771044
well im saying concealing a firearm for self defense not open carry its always been legal to carry open here
>>689770930
>owning a gun is not a right
>a luxury
2 shekels have been deposited in your account
>>689770788
With all these shootings going on and the media covering them the way they do, public opinion might be shifting faster than you think. Even the Reagan, Conservative Deity incarnate, backed the ban of semi-automatic rifles back in the late 80s. It was because of this that the 1994 ban went into place, and people are now remembering that.
>>689770657
No, but if you rob the place, or harrass someone or commit some other petty crime that would result in a minor penalty, they now have an excuse to slap you with a bigger crime by virtue of carrying a gun in a gun free zone. Again, it's not there to prevent murders.
>>689770788
this is why we cant have nice things
also, checked
>>689748230
>>689748886
Finally someone else with common sense. Thank you.
>>689771166
you seem angry that somebody might take away your big loud toys
>>689770788
Good thing Britain and Australia don't have mass shootings every week you retard.
>>689771572
you seem to be a smug libcuck
>>689752540
And watch as the territory they're trying to control is obliterated by those weapons? Try actually thinking about what you're saying
>>689771572
Your phone is big and loud. Its compensating for your lack of social abimioes. All you do is bully people with your phone.
Guys lets ban phones
>>689771607
You also have te combine populations of one of our major cities. Earth isnt taking our cues from pluto right now, sorry
I mean ... we could just change the second amendment
>>689771181
>banned or regulated
Again, you make it sound so simple. Banning guns would require the Bill of Rights to be changed and it would take away guns from all law-abiding citizens who own them.
Drugs are drugs. They are illegal, but people still sell, make, and use them. If you ban guns, it would be the same story.
Drugs are for degenerates and using them isn't exactly a right. Guns can be used for self-defense, which is a right
You still have no point. Shoo.
>>689771403
If you rob a place and threaten someone with a gun you deserve to be shot
Less criminals=less crime
And the assault weapons ban was signed at the midnight hour on the last day of legislation when no one was paying attention an they slipped it in.
It was not popular by any means, and was pushed forward by corrupt politicians. And every major study conducted on it showed it had little to no effect on gun violence.
>>689749683
exactly, the government has already become tyrannical by making everyone a slave to debt (The Fed owns the money supply, not the government and it runs it on a system of debt) and that's why they're trying to remove our right to bear arms, so that a nearby uprising doesn't happen.
>>689772069
sixty niiine
>>689750139
non stop warfare is going on in the middle east precisely BECAUSE the US doesn't allow any government of the people to rise in those areas if it doesn't benefit the US's oil hungry consumption of energy. Here, warfare would be going on until the corrupt government was completely removed.
>>689771607
You just have a ton of stabbings, muggings, assaults, rapes and overall high violent crime rates
And this latest shooting was a terrorist attack the exact same as what happened in Paris and San Bernardino and on 9/11
>>689772017
>not an ounce of blood visible
>>689772383
ahhhh sshhhiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiieeeeeeeettttttttt
>>689771727
i'm pretty smug about my free healthcare tbh
nah i like america, i'm spending a year in texas soon, and you should definitely be allowed to own guns, there are many legitimate reasons to own them, but you don't let just anyone buy a car, you need a licence and insurance, because you can kill people with it if you're a retard, guns should be treated the same
>>689771867
i'm not even sure what you're trying to say
>>689770841
>slowly phase them out of the culture
>one in every state
Huh, really makes you think. Britbong knows what he's talking about, guys
>>689772526
Real life isn't like a Quentin Tarantino movie son
>>689748230
>stand up against the government in case the government turned tyrannical and threatened the People's freedom
It does not say that and that was not its intention. Most people talk about "tyranny of government" because of a supposed quote by Thomas Jefferson that no historian can verify.
The second amendment guarantees the right of citizens to own and use weapons to defend the state. The only reasonable inference is that they deliberately didn't state what kind of weapon or what constitutes a security threat to the state.
That being said I am 100% for banning all automatic weapons and magazines over 10 rounds but that would be for all civilians including law enforcement.
>>689772773
It should be
>>689772596
oh boy texas, i hope it's austin. some places in texas can be very... how to say.... white and very opinionated
>>689772886
A good to great rifleman will drop ten rounds and relaod just as fast and accurately with a blot action as a semi auto
>>689771873
thats 1. not true, london has about the same population as new york or LA, and 2. we would still have orders of magnitude less mass shootings even if you accounted for population, i think britain has had 2 ever, you've had 2 this week
i mean i don't want to be a prick, i get that guns are a big part of your culture but you do realise that this isn't normal right?
>>689770911
>Herd of snipers
Is that like "A Murder of Crows"
>>689772773
Does blood not eventually make its way to the floor in real life?
>>689772886
>over 10 rounds
A magazine is literally just a metal or plastic box with a spring in it.
So 10 rounds is perfectly safe, but 11 rounds is super deadly and illegal?
C'mon it's all arbitrary bullshit and you know it
>>689773282
nigger faggot confirmed
austin is a shit hipster town
>>689773321
london, lmfao, lets talk about a real metro city
>>689773282
I agree but austin is like the poto negative polar opposite cesspool trany capital of the dick sucking world. If texas aint america neither is austin. Matter of fact secede you faggots.
>>689773466
Eventually, not 1/2 after being shot like in the short video
>>689773503
right, and probably the only "safe space" for a libtard coming from a country with free healthcare. elsewhere he'd probably be too triggered to function.
shit youre dense
>>689773321
>TOTALLY SAFE
>>689773582
hell doesnt texas think about splitting from the US every fucking year
>>689773282
it is actually, i'm white though so i'm probably fine
>>689763658
Pro gun here.
This is false equivalence. Two different weapons compared to a flintlock are not necessarily the same. It is also a strawman because the issue was never about if a weapon was available (or conceivable) at the time the constitution was drafted, but of the potency of the weapon especially when used in an illegal manner.
No one considers artillery, bombs and warships to be covered by the second amendment today but at one point they were.
>>689773738
all those radios and billy sticks
i feel safer just looking at the pic
>>689773417
More like a clip of bullets teehee
>>689772017
The penalties for crimes are clearly outlined in our code of law. It's not the death penalty for most of them. Who's trying to implement Sharia Law again?
>>689773469
The Second World War was won with 8-round clips, you can't stop an intruder with 10?
>>689772014
>which is a right
You have no "rights." Get it? You have "privileges" which can be taken away from you anytime "they" feel like it. sheeple.
>>689773839
>implying race is all that matters
you got a bit to learn newfriend. but im sure billy ray and his boys will be happy to host a rousing welcome party in your honor
>>689772017
>If you rob a place and threaten someone with a gun you deserve to be shot
I just had this picture and had to share it :D
>>689764297
99% of congress wont touch anything that isn't a slam dunk.
>>689773745
Wed just wouldnt be able to get away with supporting your war the way we do with other wars. Lol just want you to simmer and mutter to yourselves. You imagine if texas went all israel and pakistine on mexico? Lmao nigger the race war is real in tejas.
>>689767359
The constitution was written as a timeless document to be applied even with the changing of the times. These people weren't stupid. And to think that they couldn't even imagine advances in technology just makes you sound retarded. There was even an inventor among them...
>>689774106
it's sad to see how blind most people are to the corruption in existence. smdh
>>689773293
No, no they wont.
>>689773738
yeah london is pretty fucked, but its nothing to do with our gun laws
>>689773933
they have guns when they're guarding landmarks or dealing with armed people, but the vast majority of police work doesn't require one. they're better trained than your cops as well, i'm genuinely really impressed with how good the british police are
>>689774035
>The Second World War was won with 8-round clips
Try 20-50 round MAGS in the Thompson and 20 round mags on the BAR
>you can't stop an intruder with 10?
Who says I have to use all the rounds? It's better to have more ammunition than not enough
And who says there's only one, and that I won't miss in a high stress situation?
>>689774120
i'm not even that much of a lefty, if i can deal with gypos i can deal with rednecks, its not like americans are notoriously hard
>>689774389
They were tax dodgers and slave owners who legitimized themselves through sophistry. Just as your revisionist attempts are self serving.
>>689774106
>You have no "rights."
I do
>You only have privileges, no rights
Okay, Stalin
>taken away at any time
No, since they are protected by the Constitution
Don't you have some people to throw in gulags or something right about now?
>>689774391
Maybe from you. I cqnt believe you fucking people just listen to what is being said without trying to understand where it comes from. White americans understand oppression. Weve just never fucking put up with it. Go back to the congo and say dindu nuffin when your secon cousin cuts your arm off at the elbow in a pcp haze for stealing a glance at my balls.
>>689774598
And America's gun deaths are mostly suicides and nigger gang violence, things that gun laws won't stop
>>689774767
tell them that
>>689748230
The right to security is a human need
/thread
Yes im threading myself. Debates over. You wanna take guns away from me and my family. Come and take them
>>689753797
If the government nukes a US city to terrorize it's own people, every single American citizen who isn't a total piece of shit will have every reason to fight in the uprising against our domestic enemies.
>>689774035
>won with 8-round clips
>>689773466
It can. He was likely shot in the chest with a few 9 mm rounds. They don't always make their way through the body. When prone on the floor the quickest path for the free flowing blood is down into the body which is where most of it goes. The small bit that would come out the top would first be absorbed by clothing.
Remember, arterial spray comes from nicked arteries but a few holes in the heart stop pressure in the system.
>>689774822
They wanted the right rule their own land. Just put yourself in the same position after gaining freedom from another country. Would you not look towards the future for many years to come?
>>689774767
Bro he wasnt joking texas is something else. They literally consider themselves a territory. I fought 5 days a week in texas and im 100 percent white. Alternative is niggers. Or if your rich... i guess they have a lot of rich ppl there too...
>>689774767
lol
>>689774822
Agreed.
>>689774035
I thought it was all the light and heavy machine guns and all those bombs.
>>689748230
>>689774912
I'm confused what the fuck you're talking about. go back to playing your pc game, drinking mountain dew, fucking your cousins and shooting up elementary schools.
>>689775281
>i fought 5 days a week
about what?
Not even black people like Obama anymore.
>>689748230
One thing is certain. You will see your civil liberties eroded in far more profound ways over the next few years. And tour blindly shouting about a wepon to kill things with. Primitive human
>>689748230
"The gun has been called the great equalizer, meaning that a small person with a gun is equal to a large person, but it is a great equalizer in another way, too. It insures that the people are the equal of their government whenever that government forgets that it is servant and not master of the governed. When the British forgot that they got a revolution. And, as a result, we Americans got a Constitution; a Constitution that, as those who wrote it were determined, would keep men free. If we give up part of that Constitution we give up part of our freedom and increase the chance that we will lose it all." -Ronald Reagan
>>689775419
Strawman.
Libertarians are for small government.
>>689774611
>>689775104
Notice a strong correlation between magazine capacity higher than 10 and automatic weapons? Tell me, were you planning on laying down suppressive fire within the walls of your home and out on your front lawn?
>>689774880
>No, since they are protected by the Constitution
LOL!
"The relocation of Japanese-Americans into internment camps during World War II was one of the most flagrant violations of civil liberties in American history." jfgi
>>689775461
that's the cool part, it doesnt matter. fights over essentially nothing are extremely common.
>>689772773
>>689772773
>>689772773
b-b-but liberals say if we stop the businessowner from being able to own a gun, everything is better in society!!
>>689763290
And when we have a civil war and your family is killed you can take pride knowing that you wanted that.
>>689775445
Actually I am drinking mountain dew and oiling my 9mm...
>>689775521
Once the "right" to own guns passes, the people will be defenseless against the oligarchical rule of the government and big corps.
>>689775657
Few people own automatic weapons, what's your point?
And again, 10 rounds is perfectly safe, but 11 rounds are super deadly and illegal?
ARBITRARY. BULLSHIT.
>>689775864
...cock?
>>689775047
>Come and take them
Don't need to. Just make them illegal. If you ever use them, for any reason, you go to prison for a nice long time. End of story.
>>689775461
Just regular shit. Dude texas theres literally gunfights in the street and fights at cash registers while your trying to buy smokes. Idc what you say bro go down there and check it out. Its mostly hurr durr texas from the rednecks and gimme yo wallet from the nignigs. Sometimes vice versa. And i think weve all seen the mexicans on moderndayholocaust.wtfcartels
>>689775864
good for you, I plan on getting a few guns asap before they're banned by the corrupt shits in govt.
>>689775671
topkek, must be all the high quality coke you can get when you don't have to ship it across the atlantic
that or everyones angry at the shit beer
>>689775661
Wew. I'm glad this isn't WWII and I'm not a Jap-American
Otherwise, I'd be a little concerned
