Really makes you think

...

Other urls found in this thread:

cchrflorida.org/antidepressants-are-a-prescription-for-mass-shootings/
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

Really makes you think.

...

1st:
the machinegun in your pic IS illegal
2nd:
it was written for people to be able to defend themselves with the same type of weapons as the ones used by those whom they might need protection from

thats not even true though

All the people I've been arguing in YouTube comments in says it takes five minutes per shot.

Also if the stage had simply hired a counter-sniper, this all could have been prevented.

This has been debunked

...

The government didn't have nukes, drones, and tanks in 1790

I'm fine only having muskets if the government is only allowed muskets as well

OP is a faggot.

Time to educate yourself leaf

cchrflorida.org/antidepressants-are-a-prescription-for-mass-shootings/

You post this constantly. The only answer is go change the Constitution if you don't like it. :^)

Muskets fire an average of 3/minute
T reenactor

Also militias supplied their own cannons and civilian ships carried cannons
Also puckle gun and repeating musket

Back during the revolutionary war there are known records of citizens owning cannons, puckle guns, and warships.

There was even a documented time before that where a citizen wrote to the government asking if he could own a cannon on his land and the reply was that if the government my have it so too can a citizen.

The first occurrence of gun control in the States was in the 1930's to restrict the rights of slaves and former slaves from owning firearms.

As with most things in history, gun rights were ruined by niggers.

haha thanks, I was just waiting for a source. acting stupid is always the best way

nono, let the muricans kill eachother, much better outcome, ship some euromutts too to join them

OP BTFO

Fun fact about the puckle gun. You could get it in round or hexagonal shot. There was a captain who armed his ship with both because being shot with hexagonal bullets was thought to be more painful and he reserved those only for muslims.

>implying it's legal to buy an M249 anywhere in America

Washington: Hey Franklin, we should protect our citizens rights to have guns so they can fight against their government, just like we did.
Franklin: In the future, governments might have guns that can shoot 600+ rounds a minute though
Washington: Ah, my argument has been defeated. You are right. So we will give the government the right to have 600+ rounds/minute guns, and we will restrict the population to only 1 round/minute guns. That is totally consistent with my philosophy.

Not true. People owned fucking cannons. Also, our guns will never be removed. At least not in the next 20 years no matter how many bills they pass, Supreme Court nigger.

The "one round per minute" part of OP's post was the only bit that made me think. It made me think he's retarded.

...

There were also no processed foods and high fructose corn syrup back then. Why aren't we banning that? You don't NEED it. Diabetes, heart disease, and hypertension are the number one killers in America.

/thread

You ever notice how specific the constitution is? How specific and spelled out every amendment is? They even had the foresight to say that everything not explicitly stated as a federal power belonged to the states and to the people.

If the founders wanted people to be limited to specific arms, they would of listed those weapons by name and manufacturer, but they didnt. They didn't because they were well aware of future technological advancements and the 2nd was a guarantee that we the people would always have access to them no matter how modern.

paisà, that MG isn't even real
>rear sights blocked by G36 carry handle

(((They))) want us to have 18th-century-vintage weapons while they keep the 21st-century-vintage weapons.

Anybody serious about fighting (((them))) and having more than a nigger's chance in the ocean of winning needs access to machine guns. That's why (((they))) want to confiscate them---for redistribution, no doubt, to Muslim, Atzlanist and back nationalist shock troops.

should people be allowed to have nukes?

If the founding fathers had rifles with a cyclic rate of 600+ they would have even conquered England and make it a new states of its.

>if we applied a specific solution to a very specific incident no one could have predicted, it would of prevented this unpredictable incident
Hindsight really is 20/20.
Tomorrow you’re going to be kicking yourself for not installing a quantum rapture stabilizer for when a portal to hell opens up in your bathroom

...

this

It's depressing to see so many lies in order to push an agenda.

It was also written at a time when you could legally own a warship covered in cannons.

You are an idiot, a filthy outback. One who does not shower or brush your teeth. You have sand in your eyes, and under your arm and you have sand in your ball sack.
But, you have the nerve to tell me what I should do??
How are you going to force me to do that? With sticks and stones and words?
No matter what you aussie think, nothing will convince millions of legal law abiding non sociopathic citizens to follow what your God damn literal upside down country has to say?

You have no leg to stand on, and every picture or meme will only make people purchase more because we can.

We are number 1, we are American, and no one can be better than us, So don't even try mother fucker.

I'm all for that, maybe the lazy millennials will start physically labouring for their next meal.

Plenty of educated peeps calling for stronger prescription control. Shit's out of control

Your premise is bullshit. The founders used the word arms for a reason. If they meant muskets they would have said so. Do you think they had no idea that technology progresses? I mean there was a time with no muskets afterall...

...

Bingo. This argument that guns have changed is really an argument FOR citizens owning cutting edge guns

>36 replies
>36 fucking replies

And the first amendment was written at a time where all interstate correspondence took several days. Guess we should throw that one out too.

my next carb day i'm doing a stack of burgers just like that

I love it when retards make this argument - the people around the time of the revolution all had military grade weapons - the armies of the times used muskets, and thats what civilians were armed with. In fact, some of them even had early versions of weapons with rifled barrels, meaning they were armed with weapons more advanced than the military.

No, it doesn't. Not anymore than the last 400 times you posted it.

when will rateoffire-lets learn?

...

...

that is nu-burgers vs old beefsteakers

When governments give up their modern weapons, I will too.

This is the real point to be honest.
I don't really see how liberals can be so fucking naive that they think the government is perfect when it is clearly corrupt as fuck and immoral in every way

The government also didn’t have tanks, jets, grenades, submarines, aircraft carriers. Bet you the law would have allowed for even more arms for the people if they had them back then

Do you have any idea what the law is?

If you think the law is so simple then please go back to elementary school.

You cheeky cunt.

>one round a minute
>one fucking round

The fucking spanish can shoot two rounds a minute and they are slow as fuck.

"When the founding fathers wrote the first amendment, your voice could reach one town square per speech.

Today's television has a rate of millions.

Maybe it's time we stopped using 18th century laws to regulate 21st century speech."

>automatic rounds
burgers pls fix your (((education))) already, it eventually leaks here

>tl;dr: exterminate niggers
Like we didn't already know

Gonna try this

>an army of the people to protect democracy against a tyrannical gov
Yea but back then they didn't have Apache helis, trident subs, nukes, f35s etc.

>It's another 'liberals don't understand the purpose of the 2nd amendment' thread

While ours are significantly cooler, repeating arms were around during the writing of the Constitution. Infact they wanted them to be used as the standard arm for the army however they were deemed too expensive and subsequently waysided. These arms included the belton flintlock, the puckle gun, the girandani, and pepperbox pistols. Not only did these guns EXIST during the writing of the second amendment, but the founding fathers were huge fans. Kys and take this argument to your grave with you.

I fucking hate morons who argue false equivalences.

See

... The argument is false on its face regardless of philosophical principle. It's inarguable in the face of facts regardless of the disingenuous precept that you could compare technology from one time to another.

>our founding fathers were so stupid they didn't think at all of the future and how technology would change
Really?

IT WAS CURRENT TECHNOLOGY. REPEATING ARMS EXISTED AT THE TIME OF THE SECOND AMENDMENT IN VARIOUS FORM. STOP ARGUING THIS WRONG.

>REEE

Kek BTFO

The founding fathers also knew about longrifles which were incredibly accurate and could kill at a distance far longer than muskets.

A musket is a long gun, a rifle is a long gun with rifling .... They had fucking Gatling guns and still wrote that shit!
>Pic related
This is a puckle gun and Madison was a huge fan before the second amendment was even written!

Forgot pic

>implying a liberal would allow you to have a cannon or even a musket

MK ULTRA

No you could cycle a musket in 20 seconds if you were practiced and an m249b isn't legal unless you want to get stamps.

fyi smoothbore muzzle loading cannons are unregulated. completely.

>I get money for posting here

No they would not have my dude. 200 dudes with machine guns aren't going to shit against the full combined might of the 18th century Royal Navy brought to bear. There would be so many cannon balls and mortars coming down on you it wouldn't even be possible to see the sky

Pasta bringing the Facts.

>Under no pretext should arms and ammunition be surrendered; any attempt to disarm the workers must be frustrated, by force if necessary.
>t. Karl Marx

It's funny how things change.

>Automatic Rounds

Wat

The dumbest part is that these same niggers who pretend like the government is perfect when its about Guns but in the same breath turn around to protest it.

You can say the same about blacks. The murder rate was low in the 18th century, now they murder 600 times more people.

Fun fact extra: The square bullets were literally called "Racist" bullets because they were meant to only be shot at sandniggers.

Rifle rounds that fly around with a tiny ramjet engine under computer control until they find someone to murder.

We hand much stronger Farm Equipment Control back then, though.

correlation does not imply causation

Heheheheheh hexagonal Moor remover ehheeh

God Bless

he's already dead user

And yet somehow gun violence has been going down for over a century.
Almost seems like a deterrent or something.

that's a kiwi, brew. nice post tho

Lmao
>Tally ho lads

...

Under that logic and if you treated the first amendment with the same logic, this board would be posted on the town hall and we would he replying by nailing parchment paper to the wall.

People do own nukes. As a US citizen I own a fucking ton of them. I also own a military to help build, maintain and if needed deploy said nukes.

You know what makes me curious? Why is it that other countries where citizens are armed like the United States they don't have a mass shooting problem? Examples; Israel, Poland, Russia.

Alright Richard why don't you brag about the south Essex

They're either not as important to overthrow or they're the ones doing the overthrowing

Interesting. There is something very wrong with this country, and it's not the law-abiding gun owners.

People who believe this completely misunderstand the point of the second amendment. It's there to secure the existence of a free state, which means that citizens must be able to compete with the government's fire power. If that means we need fully automatic weapons, so be it.

>He has three legs