Sup Forums BTFO
Hes right you know
Other urls found in this thread:
this conversation is over, i dont care how many kids die. i dont even like kids. go fuck yourself
Edgy
The fuck is this boomer goin on about
THOU
...
He's unironically right. Standardized speed limits of 65 are actually bullshit. If you've ever designed a roadway you have to do a report of what the maximum safe speed is. Speed limits should be 80
hope your kid eats a bullet in math class. that edgy enough for you, faggot?
ZOOM ZOOM
Being able to legally drive on the road is a privilege. Our ability to own firearms is a constitutional right. When they add an amendment for cars then they can use this argument.
>Driving
>Right
For goodness sake, driving is a privilege, not an enumerated right that directly attacks the government's desire to infringe based upon the Social Contract (Self-defense). Founders were Hobbes/Locke promoters (Depending upon how you viewed the State of Nature).
How are you going to defend yourself if you have to walk everywhere?
>Be me
>Get shot by young black man who din do nuffin
>Drive myself to the hospital
>Going 50 in a 40
>Get pulled over
>Cop asks for my info
>Tell him I need a hospital
>Tells me to shut the fuck up and give him my info
>Hand him my info
>He goes back to his car
>10 minutes go by and vision is blurry now
>Cop wrote me a ticket
>He tells me to sign it
>I tell him I can't see
>He pulls out his gun and demands i sign it
>I start to cry
>He calls for back up
>I passout and die
Thanks Trump
11 teen deaths EVERY DAY for texting and driving – Ins. Institute for Hwy Safety Fatality Facts
We need to take away every kid's phone 18 and under along with raising the driving age to 21.
At least was being truthful about not giving a damn.
Screw your authoritative feces.
Lick the boots that wipe your ass for you. You are the epitome of a useful idiot.
This is lib-tier dyed hair color fishmouth screaming while fully nude "art"-level rationalism right there.
You can be 16 and drive.
>Mph
Fps more like it
Bill Kristol is a kike faggot controlled opposition.
Based
I didn't know he was a kike
There is no constitutional protected right to travel at a speed greater than what is regulated on public/government roads, there is a constitutional protection on the right to bear arms. Boomer Shitchell is retarded
this
You have a Fifth Amendment/due process in the individual's protection from the Fed/State of life, liberty or property/ right to "travel freely" Finnish faggot.
Driving is a privilege, not an enumeration. Supreme Court has fucked up everything to hades concerning the purpose of the 2nd Amendment.
Another Drumpf Inc cuck shows his true colors.
>right to drive
Actually when they first made the laws about cars they didn't go very fast. No one needs a car that goes faster than 30mph. Ban Assult cars
But I'm not denied the use of a car entirely
Yeah I don’t understand that it wasn’t meant to protect weapons of war comments we have heard from the bench. Those who fought in the war using their own guns that were used as weapons of war were protected from confiscation or infringement for owning said weapons by the second amendment. What historical context is used when they say these things like it wasn’t meant to protect weapons of war in the hands of citizens.
Liberals are now defending Trump
Stop Boomer posting.
Ban all Boomers from Sup Forums.
No, your edgy for being a leftist.
Nobody has asked for all guns.
My god, this is gold. Leftists are bordering on illiterate at this point.
nice deflection schlomo but were arguing against the effectiveness of (((their))) gun control solutions the same can be said about speed limits because they dont stop speeding dumbfuck
you're right. no one in this picture has ever asked for all guns.
Irrelevant. Banning the type of gun is an infringement on the owning of a gun
>there is a constitutional protection on the right to bear arms
Funny, a lot are tightly restricted, such as
>Full auto, especially after 1986
>Destructive Devices
>WMD's
So seems "shall not be infringed" isn't exactly true.
People like you need to have your families killed first before they themselves die.
See.
Just because infringement is happening doesn’t mean that the rulings or legislation is not wrong. It is still infringement and it is by the word of the law unconstitutional
what a faggot
One more restriction and war. This is a line in the sand we want crossed so step 2 balkan mode can occur.
>driving is a right
Well it's slightly better than that sticks for kids argument I suppose
False equivalence. There is no "right to drive"
Funny that the SCOTUS doesn't agree, and NFA has been on the books for 80 years.
Oh and NFA was supported by the NRA.
Oh and NFA never resulted in civil war. People were like "ok well, machine guns are kinda useless, here ya go"
Nope, no civil war, no "They gonna take ALL our guns!" nope. none of that.
driving isnt a constitutionally mandated right
Speed limits are VEHICLE control.
If they were as restrictive as gun control right now
>You'd need a permit to get in your car
>You'd need a separate permit for every multiple of 5 miles per hour you'd be going
>You'd need a permit to park your car anywhere
>You wouldn't be able to own SUV (Or Assault Cars, like anything painted black)
Meanwhile niggers give no shit and just plow through people on the regular
nice
hey now zoom zoom zoom
Privateers saved the Feds asses multiple times throughout the 19th/early 20th century. Private citizens on land owned cannons along with the latest war tech.
FDR and his goons led the march towards degeneracy. Crap, FDR jailed you if you produced more yields in your crops, even if you did not intend to sell your harvest.
So what? They’re still wrong idiot. Infringement is infringement. The SCOTUS making a ruling doesn’t mean they are correct. Weapons of war were used in the revolutionary war, the 2nd protected the citizens right to own said weapons after the Bill of Rights was ratified. Their ruling was wrong and you’re wrong for supporting it.
I and many others have nothing to live for, but plenty to die for this time.
Bring it.
I would like to note that Germany, which has the best roads in the world, has many highways without speed limit. So maybe it is about who drives and where instead?
SHALT
NOT
>dodges your handgun bullet
>teleports behind you
pshh... nothing personnel, kiddo...
Bill Mitchell has to be a paid propagandist, there's no way anyone in their right mind can continue to rationalize and support everything Trump does. Even Molyneux hasn't invited him back on the show after the last time where he insanely defended Trump's Syria attack.
...
That's a fucking lie.
Thank God I subscribe to the fn meme.
>right to drive
Driving is a privilege, not a right.
That's why you have to have a license and take a class for it.
This.
10/10
Even a 9mm ricochet looks like a line of light, streaking back at you. and thats almost half its velocity gone.
t. idiot who didnt check his backstop for rocks and shot himself
The best roads? But yeah no speed limit is great and it works, but there are constantly people, who hate their own country, trying to enforce a speed limit.
Funny because full auto has never been a majority ownership even back when you could mail order full auto guns. Plus there are more guns in circulation than there are people in America, which is probably 10x+ the amount even 50 years ago, let alone in 1934.
More people pray own guns. More people are skeptical of the government. Do the math.
Driving isn’t a right.
Even following that logic though a person can still drive whatever they want and drive however fast they want but they get a fine for doing it in certain areas.
Just like guns now.
Where did the round hit?
Trump can go fuck himself if he actually touches our guns
under rightside of ribcage and got stuck. took 6 months to recover lol
>person drives 120mph when there is a 60mph limit
>passes by a dozen police officers that don't do anything
>crashes into a bus of people
>"We need to drop the speed limits to 20mph! Nobody needs to drive that fast!"
We already have speed limits. Now we're just lowering the speed limit.
What is so difficult about this to understand?
the boomer mind at work
I mean that's exactly what happened to create school zones where the speed limit goes usually from 45+ suddenly to anywhere between 15 to 35mph depending on state.
youtube.com
The funny thing is most MNSBC watchers are eating this narrative up. They have so little experience with firearms that they think that you can't actually kill people with pistols when someone has a rifle, even though pistols are made to be used in close quarters environments like schools. They also think it's insane to even suggest that 10% of teachers would want to arm themselves.
>go over speed limit
>lose your driving license
>pay a fine
>go to jail
Yeah, this isn't taking my right to drive at all.
You just proved those restrictions are unconstitutional and should not exist. Goodnight job!
SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED
WANTS INFRASTRUCTURE
TARIFF STEEL AND ALUMINUM
PULLS A HILLARY
BLAMES VIDEO GAMES
MAGA
no, you have the constitutional right to free travel unabated, and since the government exists only to protect my rights, its the governments role to maintain and build the roads i need to pursue my right to free travel
That guy sucks trump's dick worse than Sup Forums and that's saying something
Regarding NFA, it didn't ban full auto outright; It imposed a tax stamp. When it was introduces, $200 was a lot of money (often more costly than the gun) and worked as a deterrent to buying any NFA firearm or accessory, but didn't outright ban ownership. Nowadays, the tax is cheap, and it's the red tape (and the attached strings to ownership such as random visits from the ATF) that serve to deter citizen ownership of NFA items.
Still, not an outright ban on ownership. If you're willing to pay the tax stamp, and go through all the BS, you CAN own a machine gun, silencer, etc. so while it is infringement, it technically isn't because it's not an outright ban, but only a major hassle. That's how they got around the 2A. Sort of like the marihuana tax stamp got around banning a pretty common substance. Government chicanery at it's finest!
“Take the guns first, go through due process second,” -DJT
All my keks
>SCOTUS doesn't agree
Oh wow a government entity finds a way to restrict its people's rights. Wow!
You act like the SCOTUS isn't just another government force that wants to restrict its populace. Obviously it is. Judges aren't magical all-knowing objective arbitrators, especially not SCOTUS judges, mired in politics as they are.
>NRA
Who gives a shit? I don't need some lobbyists to read the 2nd Amendment for me.
> Immigration reform isn't stopping the right to immigrate legally it's just speed limits on immigration
But let me guess, they will have mental gymnastics for this too.
Except there are many locations where certain designated speed limits are nonsensical, deliberate traps or dramatically detrimental to all traffic in a massive area.
Most speed limits on freeways and highways are too fucking slow, 65MPH maximums cause constant traffic congestion out to large swaths of road on a daily basis. Productivity gets shot in the fucking leg.
Then you have those speed traps on the open road where the cop is trolling behind that stretch where the limit for whatever reason goes from 65 to 40 for just two miles (oh it's because there are a couple hills that you don't even notice due to how shallow they are).
Shitty traffic standards and regulations in the US are a massive contribution to TRAFFIC ACCIDENTS AND DEATHS.
the MG ban was done may 1986 that BANNED all new production. That is a ban.
I cannot make or buy a new PS90. I do own an old ass mac11/9, which is a real NFA-legal machine gun, but I'd smash that thing with a hammer if I could legally make more MGs.
>people follow the speeding limit
Too Slow!
I'm not gonna dispute that... Death by a million cuts. But the NFA wouldn't have initially passed if it was a flat out ban. Over the decades they changed the law, little by little, until we have what we do today.
Citizens don't have a right to drive. Use of government roads is a privilege. We do have a right to bear arms.
>SHALL
...
Where is driving a car enumerated at?
The Constitution gives several powers to Congress, not one is dealing with a horse and buggy. Only roads enumerated were postal roads. Interstate laws were created, but again could heavily regulate the use.
Also, the Constitution does not grant rights; the Charter restricts the bureaucracy/government with interfering with the individual. The Constitution is just a bunch of negative rights inferred upon the government dumbass. The Charter also allows very narrow stipulations (Mainly Article I, sec. 8) of stuff they can do.
Everything else not enumerated is left to the States to deal with.
Bill BTFO
>>Drive myself to the hospital
Don't you have ambulances in America?
Oh right, you have a third-world tier health care system.
>Interstate highway laws
road signs are only for DRIVERS
driver=someone who works and uses the roads to make money off of
makes sense since if they didnt have that shit to worry about, pizza drivers would drive 100mph and fling your pizza through your window to make more money on commissions and tips
God, I can hear his voice.
youtube.com
The absolute state of the left. I used to think that people spouting their talking points were just trolling on here, but if you look at the comments they read 100% like the shill comments on here. They unironically call him DRUMPF and bone spurs. There's even one guy doing the "I served in the army" bit. For their evidence that rifles are more deadly they cited a single doctor who literally said the AR15 was meant to be as deadly as possible.
False reality. Like pic related you live in it.
The glaring flaw is that driving is a privelage, firearm ownership is a right. Either bad troll or (((really bad troll)))
ITT: butthurt gun fags
Your fetish for guns leads to people getting killed. What Trump's doing is completely rational. Why should young people have access to guns? Why shouldn't it be made harder for mentally unstable people to obtain firearms? Until you people can give comprehensive responses to these very mild reforms (and not "hurr it's the first step of disarming us" Alex Jones-tier stuff), I'm just going to laugh at you for being so stubborn. These are tiny fucking concessions which don't impact 99% of you.
...
It's still infringement and therefore unconstitutional.