i need assault rifles to protect myself from a tyrannical gov-

> i need assault rifles to protect myself from a tyrannical gov-

Everyone should have assault rifles. Citizens should be allowed tanks too IMO

>shoot drone pilot in head

now what?

>look, mom, I posted it again!

Your buddy Jimmy Hodgkinson sure thought a rifle would protect him from Drumpfthd.

>implying i don't have a fleet of metal gears

You know nothing about warfare. If you want to shill about gun controll you have other, much stronger arguments than this bullcrap.

Dear OP, please, kys

>I need a musket to protect myself from a tyrannical gov-

Guns are useless against the government.

The second amendment was written so the populace would be armed and the union wouldn't need to pay for a standing army.

Thank god for their shortsightedness

OP is probably the same kind of retard who laughed that americans couldn't even pacify a country of goatherds with ak47s.

You should read Turner Diaries.

I know right!?

all that technology didnt help win vietnam

When have guna EVER stopped the government!?

Except american independence was won by the French, not us, and they had to fight a standing French army and navy.

> 50 million people with guns
> against a couple of hundreds of drones

The government kept going after the assassination.

So how exactly did this kill the government?

It didn't
>Spaniard logic

Sure, it was all thanks to the froggies.
Hadn't they joined 3 years after the war began no way the regular army and militias could have won despite doing pretty well by themselves.

Lol look at this mad little bong
Let me guess, you voted remain too?

>I am a fucking retard who doesn't understand how guerilla warfare works

They got rid of a tyrant didn't they?

I wish we had guns

>i'm still posting shitpasta that is almost a decade old

Will lose

yeah but pro-gun arguments are like the borg shields in that they have an oscillating frequency that adjusts to whatever the argument is.

other arguments:

"it's my right"

"________ has guns, and look how little crime they have"

"________ banned guns, and look how much crime they still have"

"if one person had a gun at the paris terrorist attacks, the whole thing could have been stopped"

"muh hunting/target practise"

"it's the first step of a tyranical government. next they'll be knocking cans out of our hands and telling us to pick it up"

can't refute these points, but they're also irrelevant. anyways, have fun with your guns america, just keep them the fuck out of canada.

>Hadn't they joined 3 years after the war began no way the regular army and militias could have won despite doing pretty well by themselves.
Who do you think supplied them?

Oh yes, such tyrants, good thing that with every tyrant the assign him a just president

didn't read past the first line. bottom line is americans aren't giving up guns, doesn't matter how eloquently you argue.

Enjoy your "bright future", leaf

>one man and a rifle shows the US government that it is not untouchable
>lol but muh drones

Reminder that the UK's 1920 firearms act was brought in to prevent an armed workers' rebellion. Reminder that an armed population is the most effective way to check the power of the State.

>1 post by this id
>inb4 400 replies

pol nwill never learn AHHA

well I'd own a weaponized drone to but there's already law against that

The fact that you think your horribly outdated weaponry gives you a chance against the might of the us military is hysterical

t. Mongol rape baby

>rights are irrelevant
Leafs need to be gassed

>what is militia warfare

Worked for iraq, why wouldn't it work here?

Why do you think the military will be on the side of the government?

*see Vietnam, Afghanistan, Iraq etc.

>what is 4th generation warfare
You are stupid to believe that the military is always completly on the side of one fraction. Histroy shows that some Units/soldiers will almost always be on both sides and with them often their Equipment.

If a government is firing missiles from drones at it's own people, it's already doomed.

None of those arguments are contradictory, having multiple points supporting an argument is proof of a strong argument.

With all its drones the US Government is still fighting the Taliban.

>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.

>freed slaves
>tyrant
Lmao, he defended human rights
He wasn't a tyrant

What ever happened to the well regulated militia part?

>fuels a civil war
>ignores states rights
>not a tyrant

He freed slaves so he could tax them you monkey.

>obvious b8
Working pretty well in the middle east

Militia became national guard

I R A Q
R
A
Q

V I E T N A M
I
E
T
N
A
M

S T A N S
T
A
N
S

Sure as hell worked for them

...

>Guns are useless against the government.
Yeah, not like any politicians got a reminder that people aren't happy with them via gunshot today huh?

Kill yourself you disgrace of a leaf, with Trudcuck increasing our rate of cultural enrichment we sure as shit want more guns

Fair point. Give us drones too.

Only fags are afraid of guns.

Except that Kennedy actually was a real guy who wanted to help the people of the US.

He got murdered, because the Military-industrial-complex was pushing for war and he didnt give in.

>Spanish education.

Nobody asked you, faggot.

Go and get AIDS.

YOU SAY 'NO' TO MY AR-15, YOU FUCKIN' PRICK! YOU AIN'T GONNA ABLE TO SAY 'NO' TO ME WHEN I GET TO YOUR HOUSE, YOU MOTHERFUCKER!!

>I worth a one million $ drone shooting a 80k$ missile at my vehicle, just in case I was in it at this particular instant
I never felt so important.