When the founding fathers wrote the second amendment, they meant for guns that could only fire one shot!

>When the founding fathers wrote the second amendment, they meant for guns that could only fire one shot!

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=Ga38w5-jjGc
youtube.com/watch?v=wKlnMwuCZso
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

Then I can has Howitzer?

Good. Let’s all have AT-4’s then faggot

>when both parties unanimously supported the border barrier it was only for a 10ft shit fence

So nuclear is OK then?

What about single-fire depleted uranium?

You realize that you already can, yes?

You can legally buy those too.

>Artillery is the same as guns.

2nd amendment is pretty fundamental to America. IT should allow anything used by Law Enforcement and by the military. Maybe not WMD's, but certainly anything that a person can carry.

they said the right to keep and bear arms. Not the right to keep and bear single shot muzzle loading rifles.

When they invent pulsed plamsa rifles in the 30 watt range those will be covered by the second amendment.

I do not think I should have to pay the $200 tax. It is unfair.

What store?

well, post pics of them when some shill makes thread about "cannot overthrow gubbimint with an AR15"

>When the Founding Fathers wrote the Constitution only white landowning men could vote!!!

Really activates, huh?

CGI and Friends. You can get all of your needs for a small donation.

2A applies to cannons, anyway.

Second amendment mentions nothing about guns

oh right I forgot about that, so we take away all guns except muzzle loaders, and the right to vote for women and blacks.... almost worth it.

They allowed cannons that could sink ships you idiot.

2nd Amendment covered ship cannon as well faggot.

When they wrote the constitution the common man had access to the exact same firepower the military had. That's how it should be. Equal. Faggot.

Okay I miss-read OP, my bad OP

When they said a free press, they means print only. Not this high speed, assault press online.

Ben Franklin owned his own warship. The Second Amendment originally applied to all weapons, military and sporting. If we followed the laws of this land it should be legal for private citizens to own tanks, jets, missiles, etc...

You're right.... my fault.

The right to KEEP and BEAR arms, which covers a broader range of weaponry than just guns.

My fault!

Historically, guns referred to ship mounted artillery.

> Hurr durr, nobody has nuclear weapons so the 2nd amendment isn't absolute!
> Let's ban AR-15's and ass-salt weapons because the 2nd amendment isn't absolute!

Grasping at straws

you are based, user

Shh. You're letting them in on the Irish control of the press. They will start banning Irish reporters if they figure out what your people are doing.

I kinda want to get a pepper box but I would never use it.

The gun in my OP is a 24-barrel Pepperbox pistol. It was the high-capacity gun of its time, which was around the same time the second amendment was written.

The amount of people raging at OP is hilarious.
Look at the picture.
Now use your big boy brain and think about it for a few seconds before posting.

>So nuclear is OK then?
Sure, provided you can prove your ability to maintain the weapon and can pass a background check that includes regular inspections of the storage facility.
Nukes have fewer uses than guns do. Few people are trained in the maintenance of a nuke. Maintenance is a vital part of arms ownership. Also, collateral damage is never acceptable in a self defense situation. Your nuke would basically be military property and you would just be a proud patriot caring for it in place of us taxpayers.

You would need anti-aircraft and anti-tank weapons available in public places like fire extinguishers in case some fuckhead decides to pull a mass shooting with a tank or a jet. Nobody is gonna carry that around with them at all times, unlike a firearm.

We just want your political positions so we can control the gold reserves. We don't give a toss about your media.

We can own tanks and jets, old dude in my town has two tanks and a MiG trainer.

That gun uses percussion caps so it was made after 1820.

Not True Goyim. Dimona textile plant used it's own nuclear reactors. Silly US president didn't believe us and wanted to inspect. Didn't turn out well.

Quack quack motherfuckers.

it is though you idiot

guns were first used to refer to cannons
Artillery is NOT the same as firearm.

>The detail on that gun.
>The digits for that gun.

>definition of gun: a weapon incorporating a metal tube from which bullets, shells, or other missiles are propelled by explosive force, typically making a characteristic loud, sharp noise.

It is.

It’s actually more appropriate to call artillery a gun. Especially in the military.

They meant guns that can’t be reloaded.

This.
Kek’k
Check’k and agreed but still.....

Yeah but they don't fire explosives. Not saying a tank by itself isn't a great tool for causing chaos, and has happened several times. I've seen the videos of a guy in a tank going on a rampage being chased by the police. Thanks for the entertainment, America. I think you can probably own that here too. But I'm not sure I would trust any random person with the ability to fire high explosive shells at people while sheltering in a mobile steel fortress.

Don't let it happen again, fag

well too bad yah cheese eating surrender monkey because with the right taxes and permits we can own one, and the ammo.

>Nuclear power
>Nuclear weapons

Pick one.

You can own HE shells that way? Where would you buy them? You lard eating war monkey.

Pepperboxes were so badly constructed that they were usually only able to fire one single shot which consisted of all the bullets in the gun

Heh, this, also the Puckle Gun had already been invented by that time, it's basically a black powder machine gun.

They knew what was happening. Puckle guns were acquired by the US as well.

From skeeter at the swap meet, white flag.

pic of puckle gun, it was the shit at the time

cool let's go back. Ladies and blackies can turn in their vote cards while we're at it.

I legally possess armor piercing and armor piercing incendiary ammo in several calibers. It's easy to get it hilarious to use. There's an old Jewish woman who comes to the local gun shows and sells it, she's great.

Can buy flamethrower.
Only single shot

this kills the democrat

amerimutts btfo

>Be American
>Doesn't know his own laws
Let me guess, illegal or a Negro.

They still do, one bullet at a time.

I should be able to buy a frigate equiped with hundreds of cannons without a background check in case I need to lay siege to a costal city of robbers trying to break into my house.

You mean Hillary at the Kremlin, star of david flag?

arms ≠ artillery, get a late 18th century dictionary you pleb

>people falsely compare modern weapons to previous weapons when it should be that weapon's comparative damage in that time

Compared to a nuke, a rifle is a fucking spear.

>He doesn't own a cannon for home defense
I guess you're just on vacation, uh?

Those aren't quite the same thing as HE tank shells. Pretty cool though.

I believe someone actually did something similar to this.

If that was their intention, they would have written the right for guns that only fire one shot. But it was not they understood the only thing keeping citizens free from tyranny was the right to bear arms and matainence of well trained malitias

In the USA it's legal to own anti-tank rifles and black powder artillery in any caliber you wish. People are killed every few years lighting them off for 4th of July.

youtube.com/watch?v=Ga38w5-jjGc

>Tfw you will never use an anti tank rifle to blow up a row of robbers.
Why even live?

The Puckle Gun was invented in 1718 and by then multi-shot and even cartridge rifles had existed for at least 150 years. There is a great collection of early multi-shot black powder arms at the Wild Bill museum in Cody.

*blocks your path*
youtube.com/watch?v=wKlnMwuCZso

Whilst these guns were rare and more geared towards wealthy private use due to their lack of popularity, the phrasing of the Amendment is clear.

Anybody here can technically own anything, it's just that you need to be a Federal Firearms Dealer with the appropriate company, you can keep shit forever though. Many civilians simply register a company and pay the money to get a stamp for the guns, it's like a boomer hobby. I know a guy who has dozens of Thompson SMGs (his collecting interest) in full auto as well as several of the existing prototype 1911 machine pistols. Sometimes he concealed carries one of those full auto Glocks for shits and giggles.

Sure is. "Shall not be infringed."

It's almost as if these nuts didn't think a musket wasn't a formidable weapon in that era.

The Lewis and Clark expedition had a repeating airgun that was powerful enough to take medium game, they'd arrange demonstrations to wow the Indians.

These days there are several .38 caliber and even .50 caliber airguns on the US market, they are capable of taking deer or two legged game.

don't, not didn't

Pretty much. I always ask, "Is restricting weapon ownership to muskets an infringement?" And that kills their argument.

†bh ƒam you all need to go to the wild bill firearms museum in cody wyoming, if you're a foreigner faggot you'll love it as much as any american

What's the matter Britbro? No response? Guess the argument is kill then.

this is what the founding fathers had in mind

>the founding fathers want me to have a gunblade
God bless America

The Girandoni air rifle? The possibility and direction of firearms technology would be obvious to any competent leader, even enthusiast.

I only mentioned it because the Puckle gun was manufactured in small quantities, mostly for merchant ships. It may not be the case that it would be common knowledge. But the knowledge of repeating firearms would be there.

I was typing another reply. This isn't instant chat, my man. I'm agreeing with you, anyway.

Carry on then.

Many fine guns including black powder repeaters were in possession of our Founding Fathers and many of these actually survive. Quite a few were brought over by German gunsmiths too, some of whom founded the gunmaking traditions which thrived in Pennsylvania until the 20th century.

Sadly our black powder rifle making traditions about died out due to mechanization and the Colt System which was adopted around the entire world, but they have been revived and along with the Italians we're the best makers of those guns. People here shoot a lot of black powder, you can get your deer tag up to a month or so early if you hunt with black powder.

No they didn't. Any projectile is fine. Even projectiles fired at 300,000km/s

That's fascinating. Any historical sources I can start with?

ordinary people have made railguns here since the 60s user, there were plans in popular science

coilguns are somewhat popular with tinkerers among tinkerers

we've been warhammer 40k for a half century here

You are making me quite envious right now. Our laws are, frankly, pathetic. Assuming you can get a firearm and license, good luck finding somewhere to shoot larger calibres.

They didn't want people to have weapons of war, they why they let merchant ships arm themselves with cannons.

The best source for earlier guns is The Gun And Its Development by WW Greener, the famous British gun maker whose company survives and makes Best-grade British firearms up to today.

The Russians have a great site, coilgun.ru, but the British invented the concept as usual.

Not actually a machine gun. It doesn't operate automatically.

/k/ here, you're an actual retard.

Here's a high res version of that image. You're welcome.

It was a machine gun going by every definition but not "automatic repeater"

The first widely recognized machine guns all operated with cranks.

that makes a good point, technically a railgun isn't a firearm under DOJ wording.

>only civilians in a civilized nation who can own shit from pinky fingernail sized firearms to cannon and full auto firearms
>btfo
it's like you didn't even read the thread

Please point out the guns only part of the 2nd Amendment