Well Sup Forums?
Well Sup Forums?
Is that a G36 optic.
...
SHALL
Well VPN slide threader shill?
youtube.com
BE
the guns arent for hunting theyre for the govt when they come to take those guns
KEKED
If you ban them, you won't get any more happenings. No, fuck you.
KANGZ
need the smuggie for this
LMGs aren't sold to the public you dickhead.
ok, no free speech on the telephone, radio, internet, or television.
No more billions for Israel, since it didn't exist. In fact only trade with countries that existed like Prussia and Siam
Oh and we better remove the rights of niggers and women to vote
honestly its 100% correct
civilians needs mortars, grenades and RPGs to counter increasing state firepower
The moment once they confiscate and ban all your guns is the day we come marching down with Papa England landing on your shores to finally put you rebellious colonies down for good.
We've just been playing the long game and you fell for it.
Fucking cannons were permitted for private sale and you can't even get those anymore.
Reminder that our founding fathers were gun lovers, and they had machine guns/ cannons back then.
I own a muzzle-loader and support OP
/thread
Shove this sageworthy slide thread straight up your faggoty ass.
And citizens had access to the same "state of the art" weapons that the government had.
Again, whose opinion do you think you're changing with this? Anyone at all?
>Puckle Gun
>Giarandoni Air Rifle
>Private artillery companies
>Privateer naval squadrons
We need more civilian firepower in the modern world, not less.
Compared to other weapons at the time, the musket was actually a much more powerful weapon for its era.
Link the purchase page or gtfo
By my opinion the:
>maybe its time we stopped using 18th century laws to regulate 21st century weapons"
is the most retarded line ever.
Just because laws are old =/= means they're outdated or cant be applied today and should be scrapped.
Murder is illegal in the US since before the country even existed, or the 18th century if you count the county alone.
Slavery is illegal since the 19th century.
But this laws are still applicable.
Im pretty fucking sure that if the founding fathers knew about modern weapons they'd be salivating and have multiple simultaneous orgasms just to the thought of it.
Besides, the intention of the amendment is for people to defend themselves, the FF's didn't made an exclusion, they KNEW weapon tech would eventually improve, but that doesn't matters, the intention of a musket or a M1911 or a AR-15 is the fucking same, so people can defend themselves, they made that very fucking clear.
The only real solution for the weapon problem it's to stop making them.
Its sad that non-burgers understand what is happening here more than burgers.
So SAD
Totally disgraceful.
REKT
Good. If you want to change it, go change the Constitution. Come back when you succeed.
i would like to purchase 1 nuclear weapon and 1 Sarin gas because of the 2nd amendment please
We should totally ban guns because they are bad and they kill people and if we ban guns then less people will die
Also We should totally ban drugs because they are bad and they kill people and if we ban drugs then less people will die
Should tho
Except that today's weaponry is child's play compared to the shit an oppressive government would have.
>implying the avg gun nut can afford enough rounds to mow down a huge crowd
Maybe if they bought ammo with their sulprus money for months/years
The vegas shooter was rich, /k/ isn't
>implying the founding fathers wrote the constitution, bill of rights, and declaration of independence without realizing that technology will advance
ishygddt
If the right to bear arms isn't valid for all firearms, the right to free speech is not valid in all mediums and platforms.
This. Send me messages about gun control on mass hand written pamphlets then ill consider your point
Machine guns are for defending freedom faggot
okay sir that will be 20 million dollars would you like to pay with cash or charge?
i dont see the problem
You forget they saw worse. Hand to hand combat. Fields of cannon ball fire. Ethics of battle made them absolute hell. They knew what to expect. Ffs they knew their past.
He posts on the internet unironically
NOT FUCKING TRUE YOU NIGGER!
fucking nice. I feel the founding fathers smiling down upon you.
the top rifle might look "old" to you,
but in its own time it was a top-of-the-line military weapon. it fired a rifled bullet a long distance and was easier to reload.
Fuggin ancapistan
>20 million
that's cheap for a nuke and sarin gas
i'd say like a billion atleast
Oh I wasn't aware that the government still used muskets, silly me.
>1 post by this id
As long as the government has weapons like this it's citizens should also. It's not just about hunting. It's about keeping oppressive and over reaching government in check.
Thanks straya. Knew it was sage.
>2nd A
>mg4
pick one
Lmao I was actually just looking for this image but every time i asked i got Ignored.
Figured the best eay to get it was to bait Sup Forums into posting it, thanks familia
>Hey guys retarded lib here can you please easily defeat me in an argument on guns again
BORING
British infantry could fire muskets 3-4 times a minute.
Get BTFOed Americans with your shitty pleb 1 a minute rate of fire.
It's almost as if technology advances but the principles behind it stay the same or something.
low yield nuclear weapons only
the second amendment clearly prohibits personal ownership of ICBMs
>One round per minute
If you were retarded, average man was expected five aimed shots per minute.
t.history major.
Tyranical government is not possible in the modern world, so we need to get rid of guns
Honestly, this completely convinces me. I think it's about time that we properly understood the right to bear arms in its historical context and not in the context of 21st-century mass killing machines. No one has the right be bear arms that can put 500 people in hospital and kill over 50 people. No one! I'm sure Sup Forums can agree easily with this.
And who is gona go round up these guns if they were banned?? Already cant keep them away from the blacks good luck with that im sure your feelings will stop bullets
Shill
This, even Kim Jong has to pretend to be working in north koreans favor.
Woke ass bitch right here...
Freedom from illegal search and seizure only applies to houses that existed in 1789. No domicile erected after that date could’ve been foreseen by the founding fathers and therefore isn’t covered.
Oh, only 13 states actually exists since there’s no way Washington knew about Hawaii.
people with guns = citizens
people with noguns = subjects
>all I know is soon my slide fire stock is going to quadruple it's price.
Guys seriously, if you're in US. Don't forget binary triggers!!!
>This will be the only outcome out of all of this.
Syria public owned automatic weapons. Look how he'll it helped them stop the government. American government has weapons you can not even dream of. So go ahead and keep your little toys goy.
>musket
>one round per minute
They can fire at least 3 rounds per minute actually, see the Continental Army with Von Steuben or just look at how the Europeans fought with these things in the 18th century. In actuality, you can fire as much as fast as you want with the musket, so long as you are quick to load it.
Le nice strawman xd
Guns aren't the problem
thats the plan
>The founding fathers wrote the 1st amendment without radical islamic terrorism in mind
>The founding fathers wrote the 4th amendment without cellphones, computers, cars in mind
>The founding fathers wrote the 5th amendment without technicalities getting guilty people off of murder charges
>The founding fathers wrote the 8th amendment without serial killers, child rapists, and terrorists in mind
It's time to completely reexamine every single freedom we have in the 21st century. I'm sure the politicians we have today who have lived sheltered/privileged lives have our interests at heart unlike those founding fathers who fought for their own freedom and independence at risk to their own lives 2 centuries ago
>when the founding fathers wrote the 1st amendment, improper reporting in the press was limited to a regional broadsides
>todays press can spread misinformation worldwide in seconds
>maybe its time we stopped giving 18th century protections to 21st century fake news
The idea was that the constitution would change to fit the times...
They did think of weapons changing and assumed Americans would write new laws or make a new amendment instead of being brain-dead fanatical worshipers of the constitution as if it was some form of a holy document.
Or do you think the founding fathers were so stupid that they thought new laws would never be necessary and that everything they wrote in the constitution was perfect and would never be out of date?
>pay hundreds of millions for nuke + equipment to use it
>everyone knows you have it now
I’m p sure a billionaire psychopath would have more fun kidnapping the homeless to hunt on their private island, my man
Otherwise, civilian owned nukes aren’t necessarily bad considering logistics and money required to keep them going. You’d almost need to form a major corporation to keep your nuke in firing order, pay people to guard it, and have people ready to launch the damn thing. By that point, you’d almost have a proxy government of shareholders and bureaucracy set up around the nuke so that you can really only fire it in an emergency, which isn’t really any different from a government holding it. Why can governments decide if we all die in nuclear fire, but groups of civilians can’t make the same choice in retaliation?
>stop the government
the people love assad and rose up in support of him you dumb leaf. The only problem is not enough have guns so they cant defend themselves from the foreign backed muslim hordes.
WELL BOLIVINIGGER?
A lot of those sound good.
What's your argument Reddit?
Absolutely retarded argument. The second amendment was designed to outfit the people with the same weapons as the police to prevent essentially a police state from forming.
top Puckle gun invented in early 1700s used on ships
bottom Musket with more than one shot per minute
fully automatic weapons are already regulated in USA.
Bare Arm's = t shirt
They had guns that could shoot 30 rounds in a tube feeder back then. Considering the entire purpose of everything they did was to preserve America over time despite changes I seriously doubt they would be blind enough to not realize guns will improve with time
You watched too much Sharpe, nigga. 5 rpm was exceptional, 3 good and 2 average, especially in longer engagements.
t.actual historian
White men in the 1800's had slaves.
Today's white people have never had slaves.
Maybe it's time we stopped treating all white people like they had something to do with slavery and starting treating them like it is the 20th century and that they had nothing to do with it.
Shove it down your pipe hole Nigger Fagget.
>being brain-dead fanatical worshipers of the constitution as if it was some form of a holy document.
You can't bribe the constitution, you can't make a deal with it. Unlike any politician. And it proved to make US quite a advanced country. So if there is something to worship, constitution is not the worst thing around
>4people 2b able
Yeah no, go fuck yourself with a cactus you fucking kike.
>204 KB
>Anonymous (ID: Bkg/K1w0) 10/04/17(Wed)23:50:16 No.1440
No.
No
Very crafty OP, but you're still a faggot
>1 RPM
Yeah...no. It was like 3-5 depending on the level of training. Furthermore with weapons like the Puckle Gun (probably about 75 RPM), Girandoni Air Rifle (I think about 120 RPM), and the Ferguson Rifle (probably 10 RPM), and ye olde blunderbuss (which while slow, could cause more carnage at close range to an unarmored target than a modern shotgun shell) the, "dey didn't know about any weapons deadlier than a musket" myth is just that, a myth.
>I don't understand the 2nd amendment
ok, you can leave now.
Yeah they fail to mention they also had bayonets on the end of those muskets that could gut people in between reloads.
...
Sage
What part of the right to bear arms doesn’t work with modern times? Negative liberties ultimately only restrict the law abiding from taking action. In the case of things like weapons, which will likely not even be used illegally after their purchase, you’re not harming society by allowing law abiding citizens to utilize their weapons. It allows citizens to protect themselves, as well.
Or are you such an effeminate cuck that you need the government to decide what you can and can’t own in your house, and how you can or can’t protect yourself and your family? The police don’t protect, they just clean up the crime and hunt down the criminals after it’s happened.
...
>One round per minute
>Implied: Flintlocke Musket
For a fucking untrained peasant, decent soldiers could load in under 20 seconds
You also need the grapeshot copypasta, but I don't have it.
The freedom of the press is about the freedom of the contents of a newspaper, not the physical newspaper itself.