Day Two of the Militia Control Act

ITT Discussion about sane ideas for firearms control and pathways to firearms ownership.
Please contribute your thoughts and your ideas.

INB4 Defenses against modifying the 2nd amendment that consist of referencing "Shall not be abridged" and "KEEP" don't hold water and are merely token resistance, as the federal government has already long since modified the amendment repeatedly. Defenses saying "No what we need is good men to interpret the law correctly" implicitly contain the hidden argument that government officials and judges don't need to modify laws in order to interpret them in a positive manner that will have lasting ramifications.
Please don't use these defenses.

Please feel free to argue about the definition of a right and what constitutes a right and what is required to ensure a right is enforceable.
But before you do, please first state how rights are obtained from the court of a tyrant, and then argue your definition of a right
in the context of citizens who must assume that the only ones who have the capability and motives to modify their rights are tyrants.

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_Control_Act_of_1968
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

Picture related

>sane ideas for firearms control
shall not be infringed.

I already INB4'd your argument

Abridged/infringed same thing really

Edit: there is an error in the image.
I intended to put the phrase
"shotguns with under 6 rounds capacity"
in Class II.

Original image incorrect

>sane ideas for firearms control
Practice.

Oh, you mean infringing on peoples' rights? Yeah, go fuck yourself commie scum. Try it and you'll wind up in a mass grave with your faggy comrades.

See pic related.
Also: see the laws that have already taken away most of your guns.

Where the Swiss user to refute this like they always do when some faggot posts this?

I'm not posting that as a literal interpretation of what the Swiss do and what the Swiss views are.
Clearly the opinions of a woman are denigrating of what a man experiences and believes.
But it does show clearly that the Swiss are engaged in militia type activity and actively participate
in counter-occupation scenarios and training. kind of like the opposite of Jade Helm etc ?

OP is a woman. Will post pics if she doesn’t stop doing this.

>6rd limit
>literal registry for ease of confiscation
Fuck out of here with that shit, commie.

SHALL

Doesn't provide registry for firearms

No, shlomo, just a registry of firearm owners. Cute.

>hurr durr he's a jewww kill the jews
A) not a jew
B) ad hominem ?
C) Text of actual bill at bottom of attached image

It's implicit that you don't trust your state militia.

>stupid commie namefag this desperate to permit tyranny

Why do you keep including felons while pretending its OK to remove all the other fucking restrictions? Another fucking loophole because a felony can be changed per state

get fucked commie

>considered sane enough to sign a will or give testimony
Lol, all recent mass killers were sane enough.

>I'm not a jew, goys--I mean, goys! Not that our Jewish friends are evil, right?
Also, I like how you fail to consider the implication of licence and qualification, and by necessity a registry. You're either a commie or a very useful idiot. Get lost.

A felony can be erased from the books, yes. That's not a loophole, that's how our law works.
A person can and should be able to become "Of good character" in time.
I'm sorry, but any other definition of sanity would give the liberals far too much power.
Please note: most of the mass killers you know of were not in a militia.

The only qualification you would need is to show your militia membership card to your gun dealer(to purchase)
and to show it to the police(if questioned about your firearms). The goal of registries is to take away guns that have
been made illegal by stripping down the 2nd amendment. By themselves, they are useless.

that's all a bunch of semantic bullshit. banning handguns is the most effective solution to reducing gun deaths. no one is going to suggest this (on the left) because its the National RIFLE Association they really care about. and no white person is going to advocate for this because it is nigger control.

The most effective solution to reducing gun deaths is to deport black felons to Africa.
The second most effective solution is to make it a capital crime to sell crack to niggers.

no
wrong, fail.
you are weakening your ability to fight the government.

ANY regulation is something they can use to disarm you, if you don't already understand how, you are an unimaginative fool.
never say "ok, but" or "if".
The right to BEAR ARMS (as in BARE TEETH) is the RIGHT of all men of america.
If you don't like it, leave.
there are no exceptions, anyone who thinks so has no idea what america is.

I speak the truth and nothing but it, and so help me god and all forces natural and spiritual those who attempt to pervert my message through unsavory or unscrupulous methods be damned to hell and cursed to be impotent.

anything but the absolute right to bear arms for all Americans should be cast aside into the fire.

nothing but absolute freedom should be tolerated, and yes, that means war and mass murder of all evildoers.
grow up, you pompous faggot, we don't need more rules, we need more MEN, we need more FIGHTING, before the last few real men end up in jail because of article 50359835 section 395287352 part 93852834756 amendment 395u2352 which they didn't read BECAUSE NO NORMAL HUMAN BEING ON THE FACE OF THE EARTH WITH ANY MORALS OR BELIEF IN GOOD CAN OR WILL MEMORIZE ALL OF THESE GOD FORSAKING FUCKING RULES.

On the contrary "shall not be infringed" is the strongest argument. Its straight from the founders mouth that the right not be enroached upon, undermined, or broken. Unconstitutional ammendments and bullshit presidential laws do not change this.

NOT A FUCKING LOOPHOLE FOR THE FELONS. Its a god damn loophole to fucking ban specific arms for more people again when its a GUARANTEED FUCKING RIGHT.

ITS ALREADY FUCKING REGULATED OUT THE ASSHOLE.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_Control_Act_of_1968

...

I realize you are stupid, but you don't.
The 28th amendment repeals all existing firearms amendments.
That you don't understand this and continue to go into a panic about the 2nd amendment(which hasn't been effective at protecting your weapons so far, AS I FUCKING STATED IN THE OP), indicates just how stupid you are.

Stop being a faggot and fix it. Dont include felons at all. Why have them there? You are just another gun regulating faggot.

Guns are too fucking specific, I want a fucking MACE, blades only? Cudgels illegal?

You are a fgaggot

Two major problems with this logic:
"The people are the militia" but they can't own machine guns or high capacity clips.
So they can't actually act as a militia.
"the courts have ruled with the people" But they've ruled to reduce our access to weapons
numerous times.

Sane gun control means a bullet for every commie

So you agree those rules are unconstitutional and simply need to be struck down.

Because felons should get to own guns, and presently, they do not have that right in some places,
and you don't realize this because you're not a felon. I'm not a felon either, but I recognize
that restricting felons from owning guns is just a gun restriction.
Maces, blades, and cudgels are included in the law as "weapons too impractical for the armies"
see Exactly, which is why all of my target practice is done on cutouts of commies and Hillary Clinton

It's not so much that they're unconstitutional, it's that the constitution was written for a government
that no longer exists. We are ruled over by a federalist despot that will take away any rights not explicit.
"The 2nd amendment; enforced by good men" is insufficient, and it has been that way for a long time.
We're just too idealistic to realize this fact.

Why restrict felons from any access whatsoever? You are carrying over the scarlet letter faggotry shit and probably want to register people who highfive too hard as sex offenders

No. We simply need to strike down any laws that have any say whatsoever in regards to the ownership of weapons.

You mean.. I get.. I get to join.. the Michigan militia? Hahahahahah

>we're stupid
>wants to pass an ammendment which requires you be apart of a militia to purchase weapons of a certain capacity

Stupidest thing ive ever read. So youre basically regulating magazines. Kek. So any rifle, pistol, revolver etc I would be required to join a militia? Fuckoff.

Kys communist faggot. Shall not be infringed.

Again, currently they are restricted despite the fact that this is not in the constitution.
You are ignorant to the present reality and have your eyes closed.

Yes, but then they come along and they make more laws, and that's a problem that can
only be fixed by creating laws that prevent them from creating laws.

Anything over 6 rounds, including and up to a tank, buddy.

>6 rounds

No. Kill yourself. Better yet, wait for violent revolt so I can kill your children first before killing you.

Who is this "We"?
You don't have the power to strike down these laws, the government does.
Why should they strike them down when restricting your ownership of firearms
means you don't present a threat to their Jade Helm style plans?

Okay and do you not see where youre contradicting yourself, buddy? Youre saying that everyone has the right to arms, yet youre basically saying that you dont, unless youre in a militia. Almost every fucking gun in existence has a capacity of over 6 rounds, and almost every model can be increased with a special mag. Do you not see how thats a problem? Youve essentially made almost every weapon in existence a class 1, and put it behind another form of beurocracy. Congrats.

I'm in the militia and I am a gun carrying conservative.
You fail to realize that gun control is part of gun rights.
Without gun control, we don't have a pathway to ownership
of more effective weapons(presently) and we won't have
one by chanting "hurr durr 2nd amendment repeal and replace"

Hurr durr, HELLO,(nearly) everyone has the right to be in a militia YOU STUPID FUCK

If the average citizen has the iq and the strategic perception of Sup Forums,
we are truly fucked as a society.

Im not saying I dont have a right to join a militia, or anyone else doesnt, but making it a barrier between practicing your ACTUAL constitutional right makes little to no sense. Also you arms classifications are dog shit, as I already pointed out. Youre trying to argue that to own a weapon you need to be in a militia, that should not be the case.

People who want to repeal gun control laws are a tiny minority of the population.
Yet they are outspoken and make an ass of themselves any time anyone proposes a
good idea that would lead towards (strategically) more gun ownership.

Why is Sup Forums so low-iq? Literally, all I see day in and day out is trolling and shitposting,
people attacking one another, people arguing about who is the jew and who isn't,
literally nothing but monkeys..

The constitution doesn't even provide a mechanism for you to obtain weapons
I'm trying to argue that to protect our right to own our weapons, we need to create a logical justification
for their possession which holds water even in the presence of the liberals, and that people who say
we don't need that are irrational idiots who will eventually even lose the guns they now have.

Theres your problem user, youre trying to argue a logical justification to own firearms to the illogical liberals, who quite frankly dont give a shit about our constitutional rights, they dont care about any of them. Your freedom of speech? They dont care. Your right to firearms? They dont care. The mechanism for obtaining weapons is the fact that they arent illegal, and there is a market for them. Do you think a logical government would rather supply its own citizens with advanced firearms? or foreign powers like they currently do? There is nothing logical about constantly adding on and perverting what is a clear right. Dont get me wrong, I see what youre trying to do, I dont like the ban either, and yes your proposal would make it invalid, however, I dont see the merit in just piling onto the amendments when we'd just be better off making the past ones invalid.

If the open carry of handguns were made illegal, it would
A) piss off a minority of gun enthusiasts
B) do nothing about the negros with firearms since none of theirs are obtained legally

however, if we encourage the creation of low-capacity handguns, and both restrict the sale
and the possession of large capacity handguns to law abiding citizen-militia members,
A) we may drastically reduce negro access to weapons effective for drive-buy shootings
through market forces
B) law abiding citizens won't see any infringement on their rights imaginary or otherwise

Frankly, you're not far off from the truth, but there is more to my argument than you acknowledge.
The liberals do believe explicitly in participation in the militia and the military, because they believe
in the patriotic ideal of "giving one's life for one's country". We can exploit this mentality.

Making laws invalid is dramatically more difficult politically and legally than creating new ones

A right is something that no man has the authority to grant or take away. If the government can grant or take the "right" away, it isn't a right, it's a privilege.

All free citizens have inalienable rights. Gun rights are out of the governments jurisdiction.

Then we need to get our guns back, so that
we can defend this right. And in that case, what's
on the books needs to serve our ends.

Not as hard as you think. Add "All" before automatic firearms. There goes clintons law out the window. Also I dont buy your opinion of liberals, as someone who would consider myself fairly liberal had the pendulum not swung so far left, most of these people who get the media coverage and are called liberals are basically just socialist democrats and communists. The left is a hollow shell of itself. And really has been pushing anti american rhetoric for over 50 years.

>implicitly contain the hidden argument that government officials and judges don't need to modify laws in order to interpret them in a positive manner that will have lasting ramifications.
This is bullshit because it forgets that there's a certain procedure when it comes to modifying the constitution which has been completely ignored. The current way of modifying the 2nd amendment, by ignoring the extremely clear and strong statement "do not be infringed" is illegitimate. What you're saying is that it's okay to ignore the laws on changing the constitution because the end result may possibly be the same as if everyone went the legal route and succeeded. It's an insane position. I'm actually for some laws an regulations around firearms, particularly in defining the scope of the 2nd amendment, but your line of argumentation is retarded.

Obviously using the ban as an example of wording, and how it can be used to add a constiutional prescedent which can then be argued by the courts. But honestly I dont think shit will ever get through, all they argue about is money now.

Why would police be restricted to class 2? Why are shotguns with less than 6 rounds class 1?

Rights are granted by God, not the state you worship commie. Fuck off.

>Argue the definition of a right

That's how you get every politician shot.

error in the original picture, tomorrow's thread will have that corrected. Police don't need assault weapons.
Well, they need to be shot anyway

If there is no Antifa and BLM in your city, that means the cops are taking the role.

The only ones in my area for gun control either have been caught protecting pedos or are tied to leftist/labor union organized crime. Not real labor unions but controlled, corrupt unions that take money but dole out jobs to who benefits them.

The gun control areas are set up to criminalize self defense so when the cops give out your personal info and surveillance info to their drug dealer and violent parolee lackeys you either die when they come after you or get labeled a "violent terrorist" for protecting yourself against murderers, frauds and rapists.

>Need Militia membershit for any modern handgun or rifle
Fuck off.

Why not just make participation in militias mandatory at 18 or 23 for like two years? Seems kind of odd that you'd include a PT test to own an M1 Garand and a sword.
I like that you're trying to fix the fat problem, but it should be done for the entirety of school participation

SHALL NOT

...

>People who want to repeal gun control laws are a tiny minority of the population.
And yet they are winning. States are moving towards Open Carry and Concealed Carry leniency still and have been for 20 years.

Unless militias can have tanks, rockets, icbms, drones - short of WMDs.

Then - It's not living up to the constitution's intention.