Guys, I've been a strong supporter of the 2nd Amendment my entire life, but enough is enough. It is time for a change

Guys, I've been a strong supporter of the 2nd Amendment my entire life, but enough is enough. It is time for a change.

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=LSGafFKfdl4&feature=youtu.be
chamspage.blogspot.com/2017/01/2017-baltimore-city-homicides-list-and.html
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

It's getting old having to refute the same old shit all day. but here you go again. We don't have a gun problem we have a black problem.

I'll be in the next shill thread you post too, faggot.

Cars aren't a right they're a privilege

Next.

>black problem

only this time the shooter wasn't black nor were the victims

we have an American problem, faggot

this time to copy paste
Cars are a Privilege you're driving on roads everyone is paying for just like hospital needs
all shit everyone is paying for like a big club you want it buy it and follow the guidelines
Guns are a basic human right
what you do with your self defense is up to you

American needs to get civilized like the rest of the world. Ban all guns except some bb guns.

Hello shills.

I wrote a paper on gun control for a freshman composition course. I cited statistics saying that you were infinitely more likely to die by x,y,z then be killed in a mass shooting, but no one is worried about x-y-z. Mass shooting deaths are statistical outliers and anomalies. Although they're sad, it's bad policy to rewrite the laws of a country based on emotional reactions to such insignificant events. It's best to view mass shootings as natural disasters.

You aren't guaranteed a gun by the government either. You are guaranteed to be allowed to have one.

You aren't guranteed to be allowed a car

That commies want to take them away is all the evidence needed that we should keep them.

Exactly, afford one? Buy one. Can't? Don't.

Next.

What if it was a false flag and your reaction is as intended by the demonic masters?

>tumblr

Debating on regulating a Right listed in the Bill of Rights is a terrifying concept. If one Right can be over turned then so too can another. What really cracks me up is we have more deaths per year by alcohol, and when prohibition was put into play look what happened. Just imagine what will happen when the government cracks down on fire arms, particularly in a nation that has been at war since its inception, has a massive footprint in the global weapons manufacturing industry, and thousands of jobs rely on domestic sales besides. It'd be a fucking disaster.

If you really HAD been a supporter, you'd known that fully-automatic weapons are illegal/very difficult to obtain already, and gun control wouldn't have done shit in Vegas, you fucking shill.

me at the las vegas shooting
youtube.com/watch?v=LSGafFKfdl4&feature=youtu.be

Don't fuck with our guns.

SHALL NOT INFRINGE.

Go get fucked with a rake!

>Guys, I've been a strong supporter of the 2nd Amendment my entire life, but enough is enough.

You have never been a strong supporter of the 2nd A. You are full of bullshit. Why do you feel your arguments are not persuasive enough without lying?

>enough is enough

Pussy.

Sure, but reciprocal laws must be in place as well. If I operate a car or truck on my own land, that vehicle does not need a title, tag, seatbelts, I can drive it drunk around my ranch, I can give the keys to a 10 year old and let them drive it around unsupervised.

I don't need insurance, and it can be a 150db noisemaker that constantly smokes without any lights. The government cannot tell me what to do with that vehicle on my land. I only have to submit to these requirements when I take them on public roads.

So, I'll take a grenade launcher, an actual full-auto machine gun, rocket launcher, and flamethrower and with them what I want on my land without any tests, insurance ,or sobriety.

No it's not, you authoritarian shill.
You know exactly how to change it: Amend the Constitution.
But you can't. Because it's a shitty idea, because regimes like the ones you advocate killing tens of millions of citizens after they take away guns.
If you have a problem with this position, take it up with those nanny-statists on the left who went after smoking. The "give zero ground" policies around guns is 100% on them and their taking a mile when given an inch.
Talk. To. Your. Own.
They can apologize and gofund a cool $100B in reparations for stolen taxes and absurd over-regulation on cigarettes THEN we can talk about guns.
Until then, fuck off. Never.
You dumb fucking niggers showed your hand over smoking. Never talking about gun regulation, ever.
Now apologize.

Your freshmen paper used the exact same reasoning leftist shits use to downplay the threat caused by Islamic extremism.

This... they have genocide on their minds.

fag

1 post by this ID

Touché. The thing is, under our bill of rights, we have a right to own a gun. There's no right for a Muslim to come here. If you perform a statistical analysis and find out that most Muslims aren't extremists. Then that might be fine and dandy, but the 1 in 1000 that is the bad apple-- ruins the bunch, and I'd rather not bring in the other 999.

>guns are a right
???????????????????????

The difference is we are guaranteed right to bear arms and there are cultural and historical reasons to maintain our gun culture. We are not guaranteed the right to have Muslims fucking the country up all the time with their shitty culture. All Muslims being deported tomorrow would improve the country over a few years, removing all guns would destroy it in the same timeframe

>Guys, I've been a strong supporter of the 2nd Amendment my entire life, but enough is enough. It is time for a change.
Our firearm rights aren't subject to firearm deaths.

Prove me wrong. Oh wait, you can't.

2nd Amendment.

Next.

>Ban all guns
How will you do that exactly?

No...honestly...how?

cars kill more people than guns you fucking retard mongloid

>>guns are a right
>???????????????????????
Firearms are a right protected by the constitution.

The constitution does not grant us our rights. It protects them.

Hence why they're called "Constitutionally protected rights" and not "Constitutionally granted rights."

Right except the 2nd amendment was written at a time when the most advanced weapon available to you was a musket. Kind of hard to perform a mass shooting with that kind of firearm.

How would you justify unrestricted use of military grade weapons, especially of the automatic variety, for civilian use when it can cause so much damage to an unsuspecting crowd. This is also a situation where even if the entire crowd was armed, it would have done jack shit to stop the guy firing from such a huge distance and height.

Not sure whats wrong with regulating gun ownership the way you would regulate car ownership. Pretty common sense if you ask me.

Endless 24/7 shilling

>Guys, I've been a strong supporter of the 2nd Amendment my entire life, but enough is enough. It is time for a change.

No you haven't.

Not true.
You don't re-take your driving test before you buy every car.

Blind, crippled, 90-year-old ladies hit people all the time and they still have a license.

There is no right to drive a car faggot. Go to the EU if guns trigger you so much.

>Right except the 2nd amendment was written at a time when the most advanced weapon available to you was a musket.
The second amendment is about why firearms are a right. Not about what firearms are legalized by by the government.

>Kind of hard to perform a mass shooting with that kind of firearm.
Not that our rights are subject to mass shootings, mind you.

>How would you justify unrestricted use of military grade weapons, especially of the automatic variety, for civilian use when it can cause so much damage to an unsuspecting crowd.
Because we are innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. Why are you attempting to assume everyone who wants one of those weapons wants them to break the law?

>This is also a situation where even if the entire crowd was armed, it would have done jack shit to stop the guy firing from such a huge distance and height.
So why do you want to disarm the entire crowd then?

>Not sure whats wrong with regulating gun ownership
It's unconstitutional. It infringes upon our rights.

>he way you would regulate car ownership.
Driving a car is a privilege, not a right. Owning firearms is a right not a privilege.
Besides, anyone can buy a vehicle as long as they have the money. Not so with firearms.

>Pretty common sense if you ask me.
...At the expense of our rights.

>Right except the 2nd amendment was written at a time when the most advanced weapon available to you was a musket.

Then the first Amendment does not apply to niggers or Islam.

slide thread
>1 post by this ID
sage

This is clearly a shill, but this image falls flat in one simple counterpoint. How many people are killed in auto accidents compared to gun deaths, mass shooting or otherwise? Far more by a wide margin. Even with all of the regulation you cite would prevent this. So if we correlate this, regulating guns like we do cars would only increase the amount of people who die

Transportation actually is a human right in Sweden. That said, you're going to have your persuasion skill at 100 to convince the government to actually get you a car rather than a bus pass or a train pass.

Only country in the world that wonders why this happens regularly

...

>When I read that Connecticut cunt senator going "2nd amendment isn't a god given right"

I'm not even religious, but I found it really disturbing and emblematic of a mind that believes in government is god rationale.

There is a right for muslims to believe in their moon god if they are here. Just as we have a right to bear arms and defend ourselves. If they want to start carving up the bill of rights they better understand that the right is going to carve up just as much. I hope they like an amendment calling for life begins at conception, an amendment that recognizes America is a Judeo-Christian nation, an amendment that requires a president be Christian or Jewish.

First amendment wasn't written at a time when another country could immediately instantly send seditious messages and information. You want to restrict the 2nd amendment to the time and place of the revolution we restrict the first amendment to the time and place of the revolution. No communism, no marxism, no feminism, no black lives matter, no Muslim brotherhood inspired jihadism, no progressivism.

>Only country in the world that wonders why this happens regularly
Imagine if we heard news reports on ever mass shooting in the middle east and africa...

Driving a car is a privilege. Owning a gun is a right. Too bad, retarded millennial.

No you haven't been you lying piece of shit. This is a classical tactic to say you used to be one of us but changed your mind. It's always a lie. OP is a faggot.

False.

"The Right of the Citizen to travel upon the public highways and to transport his property thereon, either by horse drawn carriage or by automobile, is not a mere privilege which a city can prohibit or permit at will, but a common Right which he has under the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness."

Were not disarming no matter how many crazy leftists you idiot elites wind up. As soon as we do, we will see hate speech laws amd government agents taking people away for wrong think.

chamspage.blogspot.com/2017/01/2017-baltimore-city-homicides-list-and.html

271 dead in Baltimore alone in 2017. I guess black lives really don't matter..

>I like X.... but

I was going to respond. but did a fine job already The founders of the country explicitly stated in their essays, the reasons behind wanting a second amendment: to have a bulwark against a tyrannical government and foreign invaders. The idea of presuming guilt on an American, and denying them an enshrined right based on that, is just completely a non-starter and IS why the gun control side can't gain any momentum. Tearing up the bill of rights is a nonstarter. You can call this a slippery slope, but if you start reinterpreting laws based on our modern day feelings, instead of what the INTENT of the authors (textualism), then our rule of law will become absolutely meaningless.

>HEY GOYS IM JUST A REGULAR GUN SUPPORTER JUST LIKE YOU, PLEASE LISTEN TO MY OPINION SINCE I HAVE LUSTED FOR GUNS MY WHOLE LIFE, ENOUGH IS ENOUGH THOUGH, THE SECOND AMENDMENT ISNT VALUED BY ME

>Sweden
So is gang raping the native swedes by mudslime

Next.

Dumbest fucking argument on the internet this year has been won.

>"The Right of the Citizen to travel upon the public highways and to transport his property thereon, either by horse drawn carriage or by automobile, is not a mere privilege which a city can prohibit or permit at will, but a common Right which he has under the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness."
And people may travel by any of those means freely (as in not be restricted, not "doesn't have to pay"). But if they want to drive a vehicle, they need to have a license.

No one is stopping you from walking, biking, flying, bussing, etc to another state. So your right to travel is not being infringed by requiring a license.

>usage not ownership

Next.

I also want to get rid of the first amendment
, or at least enact some smart legislation on it. We can't have people going around and saying things that make people kill themselves, of slandering the Prophet, or just saying mean things in general. I am for 'smart' regulation of the 1st amendment.n while we are at it let's curtail the 7th amendemnt some, jury trials are silly, why have dumb jurors when you can have a law school educated judge being the jury as well!

>Were not disarming no matter how many crazy leftists you idiot elites wind up. As soon as we do, we will see hate speech laws amd government agents taking people away for wrong think.
This isn't abut "saving lives" like the gungrabbers claim. This is about giving the government a monopoly on force.

And they'd still get used to kill people. Like cars.

>abut
OH GOD NO! I'M TURNING INTO A CANADIAN! AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!

*ahem*

>This isn't about
fixed that for me

To be fair, we have already let the 2nd amendment be infringed upon many times.

but they are as regulated as cars and even harder to get by regular people, it's just your mongoloid halfbreed country that gives them for free with each Happy meal. everybody in your country should go and buy one and kill themselves, that way the world would be a better place.

>I want a cannon, that was around then

We shouldn't have driver's licenses. Seatbelts were a mistake as well.

...

Fuck no. Stephen Paddock and James Hodgkinson show us what the 2nd Amendment is all about. Drumpfkin gun grabbers can go fuck themselves.

I agree with OP.
With guns banned, criminals and crazy people will resort to using their bare hands to kill, saving countless lives. A side benefit is that victims will have a chance to defend themselves against an unarmed attacker, whereas they would stand no chance against one armed with a gun.

False.

"NOT a mere privilege which a city can prohibit or PERMIT at will..."

>Black problem
>BLACK

lol are you actually fucking serious right now

You're right. I can't keep banging your mom forever. Brown bag only helps so much.

Fuck off communist faggot

>"NOT a mere privilege which a city can prohibit or PERMIT at will..."
Traveling to another state is not a privilege as anyone can do it.
You are not prohibited by traveling to another state by not having a license.
You do not require a permit to travel to another state.

You still haven't proven that having a driver's license is a right.

this.
did the founders need a driver's license to pilot a horse or a buggy around? fuck no, the thought never entered their minds. the right of free travel was instrumental in concocting the federal republic, that no citizen be denied entry to another state.

1. I doubt the founding fathers considered what kind of weapons would be developed in the future. I mean, are you an Ancap that believes tanks and military helicopters, even Nukes, should not be unrestricted to civilians?

2. At some point the government can restrict your rights in order to preserve public peace if the need arises. Not that im saying it should be at this time or because of this event mind you. Just in theory.

3. A schizo or any other person with significant mental illness should not have the right to a force amplifier capable of mowing down crowds.

4, I didn't say that. But id expect to be able to go to a concert without people brandishing guns freely, especially of the kind you seem to believe people should have a right to own. Do I want to go somewhere and see someone freely carrying a fucking M240, no.

>It's unconstitutional. It infringes upon our rights.
Oh ok, so is regulating automobile use infringing on your rights too? At some point your rights are going to have to end where it starts to threaten public safety.

>Driving a car is a privilege, not a right. Owning firearms is a right not a privilege.
Thats some pretty wonky logic. Both are capable of inflicting great harm on people yet for some reason you allow firearm use a pass because some old farts wrote down that you have the right to own firearms, clearly meaning to anyone with any shred of honesty or common sense that they meant muskets...not fucking flamethrowers, gattling guns, or Cruise Missles. etc.

>...At the expense of our rights.
Fuck your rights then if they make absolutely 0 sense to preserve.

But first does applies to niggers and Islam so 2nd applies to GE mini guns, M1A2 Abrams, and ICBMs.

Ok pirate fag

I agree, stronger regulations will help prevent guns from being in the hands of people who are unable to use the properly

It is incredible how people still don't understand the difference between the RIGHT to self-defense also regulated by the 2nd amendment and your consumer CHOICE to buy a car.

>he gives up his freedoms in exchange for the illusion of safety
You are a traitor to your country

>he still thinks playing by their rules will get you anywhere
Read Rules for Radicals, that kike knew what he was talking about

>You still haven't proven that having a driver's license is a right.

Thats because I dont need to. Drivers licenses are not required because it is our right to travel, either by horse drawn carriage or by automobile.

>Burger doesn't know his own constitution
Sad.

You dont need a title and tag go buy a car, you do need both to use them on public roads. Many farm vehicles and race cars are never titled or tagged

You only need driver training to drive on a public road. On private roads it's up to the owner of the property

see above, testing is for the driver driving on state owned roads. etc etc.

I do support the 2nd amendment, but have no problems with regulations for carrying a gun outside your property.

Yes. Even with all of the mass shootings done by white guys, blacks are still vastly over represented in gun murderers.

> Fuck your rights
There it is, there's the agenda.

>First amendment wasn't written at a time when another country could immediately instantly send seditious messages and information.

I fail to see how Russia being able to influence American public opinion is an argument to curtail free speech.

Also most of the controversy about restricting free speech is based on American sjws trying to ban hate speech. How is that connected to your foreign interference argument?

>1. I doubt the founding fathers considered what kind of weapons would be developed in the future.
It doesn't matter. Again, 1st amd. is about why firearms are legal. not what firearms are legal.

>I mean, are you an Ancap that believes tanks and military helicopters, even Nukes, should not be unrestricted to civilians?
I'm natsoc and I believe all those minus nukes should be available.

>2. At some point the government can restrict your rights in order to preserve public peace if the need arises.
Then its not a right it's a privilege a tyrannical government can take away at any time.

How does taking away a law abiding persons rights make the public safer?

>3. A schizo or any other person with significant mental illness should not have the right to a force amplifier capable of mowing down crowds.
If they're so crazy they'd kill innocents, get them off the street and leave our rights alone.

> But id expect to be able to go to a concert without people brandishing guns freely,
You're free not to go to the concert then.

>Do I want to go somewhere and see someone freely carrying a fucking M240, no.
Pussy.

>Oh ok, so is regulating automobile use infringing on your rights too?
Driving is a privilege, firearms are a right.

>At some point your rights are going to have to end where it starts to threaten public safety.
I'm not threatening anyone. Why are you treating me as if I am?

> Both are capable of inflicting great harm on people
By a tiny minority of the product.

>yet for some reason you allow firearm use a pass because some old farts wrote down that you have the right to own firearms
We have the right to firearms regardless of what they said.

>clearly meaning to anyone with any shred of honesty or common sense that they meant muskets...not fucking flamethrowers, gattling guns, or Cruise Missles. etc.
Then why aren't those weapons listed in the 2nd?

>Fuck your rights then if they make absolutely 0 sense to preserve.
My rights trump your feelings.

>ignore the whole post
typical gun retard behavior

>Thats because I dont need to.
Then you have no argument.

> Drivers licenses are not required because it is our right to travel, either by horse drawn carriage or by automobile.
Driver's licenses are required to drive.
You are not required to drive to travel.
Therefore, driver's licenses are not a right.

Unless you have a demonstrable reason not to be sold a car or a gun, they still give you one! Surprise surprise.

>There it is, there's the agenda.
Exactly. They believe the only way they can feel safer is by stripping us of our rights and giving them over to the government.

It's a kike, not a millennial.

How fucking egoistic can Americans be? what the fuck is wrong with you?

>You should give up your rights because the government says you don't need them.
wut