End of the gun debate

The definition of arms at the time the constitution was written is key.

youtube.com/watch?v=7DYeYkJkqgs

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Girandoni_air_rifle
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Bill_of_Rights
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Puckle_gun
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federalist_No._46
youtube.com/watch?v=GdtqtfXdR-c
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Girandoni_air_rifle

Was Assassins Creed real and the Founders had the Apple?

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Bill_of_Rights

Well gee, sure seems to me that repeating rifles existed before the second amendment was even written. Really makes you think.

You are the reason we can't have nice things here.

>The definition of arms at the time the constitution was written is key.
The 2nd amendment is about why arms are to be legal, not about what arms are to be legal.

Regardless, our firearm rights exist separate from the bill of rights.

We’ll go ahead and turn in that phone, tv, and internet because the founders expected your free speech to only be used on parchment and ink and your voice.

the govt had the same arms as citizens, fgt. time to buy a tank

>The definition of arms at the time the constitution was written is key.
The definition of "The Press" at the time The Constitution was written is key

That reminds me, I should look into getting wood furniture for my AR.

So nobody else finds it funny that repeating rifles existed at the time the second amendment was written, which entails the fact that expansion of such weaponry was thought of, essentially meaning that they knew that they would eventually be widespread.

>HURR BUY MY GUNZ PLSS

I go home in 6 months. Are AR prices going to be sky high? fml

Exactly. My AR itself is the defense of my Liberty to have it. FMCDH. I require no approval from a politician or a celebrity. I don’t give a damn what they say. I would prefer they direct their efforts at improving the shit they have fucked up elsewhere but any attempt to turn me into a disarmed victim of their stupid shit is NOT going to happen. Yes, I will die first. I suspect at least 1% of US gun owners agree with me. Good luck trying to disarm us.

The reason the War for Independence sparked off was becasue the bongs were coming to confiscate "ball & cannon".

Thats fucking artillery.

Fuck full autos, suppressors, short barreled rifles & constitutional carry. I WANT MY ARTY.

RPGs.
Drones.
A-10s.

Thats the direction we're going now. Not asking for what is already ours.

Advertising is a violation of the rules.

Nah. They can be had for as little as $500.

Found the shill. That video is clearly a well thought out lesson on the 2nd Amendment and some history as well. We're keeping our guns and if you don't like it you can move to France.

You can own all those. They’re just expensive. There’s companies in Colorado and Utah which clear avalanches using artillary. Also, fuck repeaters, the founders had full auto

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Puckle_gun

I wouldn't no, I don't click non-archived videos posted on Sup Forums because they get money regardless of how the video is voted or what kind of comments are left. I won't feed your shill mouth, kike.

Who is behind gun control?
Does it anwser your question?

The shill calling someone else a shill to cover his own shilling. What's wrong? The video a little...TOO effective for your tastes? Your gun control utopia dreams are DOA. We're taking back this country and keeping our freedom.

What is being said? I can find this moment in the conference and would like some context.

Here are some quotes from around the time the constitution was written about arms and the militia.

“A militia when properly formed are in fact the people themselves…and include, according to the past and general usuage of the states, all men capable of bearing arms… "To preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of the people always possess arms, and be taught alike, especially when young, how to use them."
- Richard Henry Lee, Federal Farmer No. 18, January 25, 1788

"Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed, as they are in almost every country in Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops."
- Noah Webster, An Examination of the Leading Principles of the Federal Constitution, October 10, 1787

"Besides the advantage of being armed, which the Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation, the existence of subordinate governments, to which the people are attached, and by which the militia officers are appointed, forms a barrier against the enterprises of ambition, more insurmountable than any which a simple government of any form can admit of."
- James Madison, Federalist No. 46, January 29, 1788

"...the ultimate authority, wherever the derivative may be found, resides in the people alone..."
- James Madison, Federalist No. 46, January 29, 1788

and some more...


"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
- William Pitt (the Younger), Speech in the House of Commons, November 18, 1783

"Laws that forbid the carrying of arms. . . disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes. . . Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man."
- Jefferson's "Commonplace Book," 1774-1776, quoting from On Crimes and Punishment, by criminologist Cesare Beccaria, 1764

"The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. A well regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms, is the best and most natural defense of a free country."
- James Madison, I Annals of Congress 434, June 8, 1789

Federalist Papers No. 46, written by James Madison is the basis of our reasoning of our right to keep and bear arms.

>en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federalist_No._46

>The right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed means people can own and carry any weapons they like

Sup Forums already knew this.

The 2nd secures the ability to form a militia by guaranteeing the right of an individual to keep arms for the security of self and the people.
The militia was intended to be an inactive reserve force not beholden to any entity other than the people (not the government), to be activated in a time of need for defense of the nation or defense from the nation.
The militia were, and later framed to be, a standing army of infantry.
Thus the weapons available to the militia should at least be equivalent to the basic infantry rifleman.
No tanks, arty, rockets, mortars, etc.
However you could possibly make an argument for hand grenades.

It's all in the branding
youtube.com/watch?v=GdtqtfXdR-c

Exactly. The gun grabbers have been at this for so long pretty much every gun owner here has been educated well as to why “FMCDH” is the ONLY response.

This.
All men across the entire world have the right to self-defense (and, by extension, the right to defend their families and property). This is a natural right and it is not “granted” by any worldly power. A Brit has the same right as an American. The difference is the British government abuses the rights of its people (more) than the American government in this regard. If a Brit owns the means for effective self-defense he has done nothing wrong. He may be unjustly punished by his government, but his conscience is clean.

I still don't understand how full autos are banned.....

It was a mistake. Fixing that mistake is pretty low priority as FA is slightly less of a useless gimmick than a “bumps stock”. Pretty much a novelty. For a couple thousand bucks in a gun and ammo one can become pretty proficient with a semi auto. To really learn to fire FA effectively I suspect costs upwards of $10,000 in ammo alone. You can buy an M16 for about $30,000 dollars here but at $.40 to $.50 a round at 600 rounds per minute the cash register is ringing pretty good.

In a tactical sense where a FA weapon fits is at the squad level so one guy can provide “suppressive fire” while other elements reposition. It really is not intended to actually hit anything.

And in this environment the liberal news will run their fantasies of crazy white men spraying down classrooms of diverse children 24/7

Not this shit again..... If that were true only machine guns would be full auto.
There is a reason why they developed the full auto service rifle and there's a reason they further developed it to fire controllably and there's a reason they developed the burst feature.

M-16s were SPECIFICALLY DESIGNED to fire full auto burst accurately with controllable recoil.

they go on sales or specials during these news cycles. hopefully you get here soon enough, just got one for five hundred even and it included two mags, one hundred rounds, and a softcase. NH here btw

M16s were provided in Vietnam Nam so EVERYONE in the squad could provide suppressive fire. Watch the old news reels. Guys holding the rifle over their heads and spraying the jungle. As I said, I do believe it costs quite a bit to achieve a level of proficiency you see on Jewtube where a guy shoot 30 rounds into one target. My question is how much deader is a guy who has been hit 30 times in the chest than a guy who has been tapped twice in the chest and once in the head?

Seems there was a brief period some years back that one could buy a lower and shop for an upper and parts and come out cheaper than buying an entire AR. It didn’t last long. Capaitalism is a wonderful thing. Now you can buy a complete rifle cheaper than the parts.

No where in the 2nd are "arms" defined, and if you argue that it was intended for "muskets", then you're arguing it was intended for citizens to have access to whatever the armed forces uses at any given time, since that what muskets were.

Yeah, but they're shit rifles and you miss out on the fun of building it.

He's right guys. It also said that blacks are property and women can't vote so...

1 rifle in 1 war was all it took to find out how bad of an idea it was.
Shtf in the jungle and Joe blows his combat load of ammo in 2 minutes.
That's why we have 3rnd burst now but even then we rarely use it.

No its not.

I think it meant they got warships and cannons too. So translating that to modern day, yes we should be able to buy tanks, mortors, rockets and artillery.

...

>full auto is about shooting a guy 30 times

Mate war is not like target shooting, they don't just stand out in the open in one spot, they DO shoot back.
How often do you think you're going to have a full sighted view of your target and time to aim? It happens sure, but not all the time, most of the time you're probably taking pot shots where you think an enemy might be or reacting to a split second sighting.

Why fire 1 bullet when you can fire 3? The first bullet still goes in the exact same spot and the next two don't spread out much and you increase you chances of actually hitting something.

That's down to training.

The intent of the second amendment is to not form a technocracy for weaponry, which it has failed to protect because Jews have economically and politically placed a technocracy into order.

Yeah but you are describing 3 round burst not real FA. Don’t get me wrong, I would like FA Rock and Roll for fun. My one regret about the years I spent in the Army was I never have fired a FA. But when I look at my list of priorities for pushing back the ridiculous laws we have a lot comes above that. Suppressors, for one. I would love to see National Reciprocity for CCW even though I admit there is a 10th Amendment issue. There are other things with a much higher priority. When we are down to “now it is time for FA” we can know we have finally, completely won.

Like I said though, FA is almost exclusively for suppressive fire which is a squad level thing. For one guy suppressive fire just doesn’t make sense. The way things are right now any “civilian squad” is going to be half FBI informants so what the hell is the point?

Yeah but mate firstly; 3 rounds bursts are a feature of a full auto gun, secondly you can do burst with your finger.

But this all came up because I honestly don't understand how full auto bans, or any of these other bans, are legally binding - given they clearly aren't constitutional.

What I described isn't suppressive fire - suppressive fire is, as the name would suggest, a consistent fire with or without direct sighting designed to suppress the enemies movements.

Thats right, free speech doesn't apply to phones or the Internet, those didn't exist when the first amendment was written.
All constitutional rights don't even apply to you or me, because we didn't exist when the constitution was written.

You are right IMHO that the SCOTUS has said that we have the right to a “standard infantry weapon” and that currently includes an array of M4s with 3 round burst and MP5s and such with FA. I just see other priorities such as suppressors and eliminating gun free zones coming before FA. My hope is one day we can get there.

man of taste detected

this