"A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state...

"A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed"
>what does Sup Forums think of the 2nd amendment?

Other urls found in this thread:

globalresearch.ca/twenty-five-rules-of-disinformation/24889
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

>militia

>well-regulated

It's fine, you know? It's part of what sets America apart, and we should be as proud of it as we are of the first ammendment.
However.
There is absolutely nothing wrong with passing smart laws to help keep guns out of the wrong hands. Things like a 5 year waiting period for anyone that has been recently removed from the terrorist watch list, or people on no-fly lists.
It's not as though the constitution or the language of the amendments are absolute. The supreme court has already decided this. If you want a simple example, it was made illegal to shout "fire" falsely in a theatre, clearly against the first ammendment, right?

...

what is this? are you failing to understand context here? what if I said that not all speech is "free speech"?

w/o the 2nd, there would be no other amendments

lol, shut up. Take your "things my republican uncle emailed me" memes and go. We're all so grateful that your semi automatic rifle scares the federal government and preserves our right to call you an idiot.

The 2nd amendment is the most important right any free people could have.

SHALL

NOT

you know there are 300 million legal guns in the US... do you really think the are all owned by "redneck/hillbilly/republicans" or are you just actually a dumb person?

BE

INFRINGED

This.

That America has become such a nation of pussies it's willing to try to bargain away its rights rather than use them doesn't change that those rights are unalienable.

I never called you anything but an idiot. It's your own fault that you associate that word with those words. :^)

I THINK WE SHOULD SHOOT IT

>A well regulated militia

>well regulated

First they say they want a militia

Then they say they want it regulated

But they never say who ought to be in charge of creating or enforcing the regulations.

Not all speech is free speech. Supreme Court has ruled on that numerous times.

The fact that you resort to name calling just proves my point. Feel free to continue living in fantasy land where the gov't and liberal media spoon-feed you what to think. When the day comes, I'll defend your sorry ass, even though you don't deserve it.

Nice pellet gun faggot.

I used to be a Democrat, big time.

I'm a bit more conservative now, but through it all, I kept ONE thing the same in my mind.

SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED.

The second amendment was created so that citizens would have the means to challenge a corrupt government, any kind of regulations that weaken the peoples ability to fight is therefore unconstitutional

If the government is tyrannical "suspected terrorist" is another term for patriot

I don't currently believe the government is tyrannical, they are just paving the way for tyranny with good intentions

I am not that user you replied to I actually know you are a fucking idiot. I didn't associate anything with anything you quoted "things my replublican unkle memed huehue"
faggot
which is another example of our rights being shit on... if not all speech is free speech then we do not have free speech... fucking dumbass

I think we should let it go

It's awesome

Seriously, shut up. You're no different than a nerd with katanas, dreaming of dueling your HS bully. Your guns would be absolutely useless against the US government, as would mine. How do I shoot down drones and stop tanks with my .308?

Is that pic an instructional on pistol/shot placement for Trump fans so they can't miss?

I love it.

why does every idiot who come to my thread think that a pic of a hat and a gun means anything more than
>shall not be infringed
>make america great again
are you stupid or something?

Because nobody is in charge of it. Don't assume well regulated means the same now as it did 250 year ago. Well regulated simply means in proper order. If I have a well regulated engine, it means the oil is good, timing chain is set properly, iemaintained and running as anticipated. A well regulated engine is not one that is overseen by 20 different agencies.

they'd be able to miss.

A better way to look at the Constitution's amendments is to view them more as 'privelages' rather than rights. And if you use your brain to think rather than complain, whine, bitch or moan - perhaps you can escape the bliss of ignorance.

>But they never say who ought to be in charge of creating or enforcing the regulations.
because it is the right of the PEOPLE to keep and bear arms... can you seriously not read?
are you a dog or are you PEOPLE? if you are the former then they won't give you and FFL sorry pupper

>Your guns would be absolutely useless against the UK government, as would mine. How do I shoot down rows of trained military troops, cavalry and cannons with my musket?

What you paint chip snacking retards fail to understand, is that the only thing a primate respects is power. If you did a minimum of research, you would see that civillian access to firearms is absolutely positive for society.

Seriously, i can quote stats and anecdotes all day, but youd learn nothing. Instead, just try this: for once in your intellectually deprived life, briefly accept your oppositions arguments, and look for data that supports their claims. Dont worry, you can go back to nibbling dried paint at you convenience.

The fact is if you have no means to defend yourself, there will inevitably be someone around to exploit that weakness, be it your street corner crack dealer or the goverment or anything in between.

>perhaps you can escape the bliss of ignorance.

It is a necessary part of our Constitution and this is why Donald Trump will win

Are you really that naive to think the US military would actually turn on its own? You think that if the CiC says to roll tanks into a city, that they would all just say "Ok" and do it? How do you think the population en-masse would respond? Btw, the US armed forces has less than 10,000 tanks. How many of them would they send against just little ole me? How many of my 80+ Million brothers and arms would stand for that? Think again (if you can).

Officially a Block II thread.

Sorry, didn't realize that you were stupid. If your right directly violates anothers right, then the offending right is stripped. If your right to free speech causes me to lose my right to vote in some manner, then that speech is not protected. You realise rights can violate each other and you are not the only person who exists, right?

...

...

>Are you really that naive to think the German/North Korean/Soviet/Cambodian military would actually turn on its own?

See, this shit right here.
If the us gov't wanted to kill you, they would blow up your house with a predator drone. You already don't have the means to protect yourself, what the fuck is actually your point?

>If your right directly violates anothers right, then the offending right is stripped
>my speech is hurt by your speech
>WAAAAAHHHHHHH

can you be anymore of an SJW? you can say you have read and understood the constitution but don't think we have free speech because we lost that shit when "political correctness" became standard

fuck a cactus, kiddo
people like you are the reason europe is a cucked laughingstock overrun my muslim hordes and drained by blood sucking jews.

oh is that offensive to you bby?

Love it

If you think the US government is anything like that then maybe you should ask yourself how well gun control/disarmament worked for them.

I agree. I can see no point in history where a military obeyed orders that were contrary to the greater good under the thought that by following orders the military member's would be safe from the tyrant. Nope, not a single time in history. Thank you for the compelling arguement.

what right could free speech possibly infringe upon? how could me saying something stop you from voting? am i controlling you with words? whose fault is that? these are the questions you should ask yourself user

The Constitution served it's purpose but America outgrew it. Burn the fucking thing and move on.

>If your right to free speech causes me to lose my right to vote in some manner,
fucking explain yourself idiot boy

that other user was being sarcastic, as the americans did shoot down row after row of trained british troops. and also, the us govt would not survive a civil war with its people.

I believe that my brothers, armed and ready to defend my freedom, would fight in my stead. The government will run out of drones before the people run out of patriots.

And how many houses would they have to blow up before civil war started? What happens when they run out of missles?

Slightly older pic

Then my friends, family, neighbors, and /k/omrads would be pretty upset
For every act a government takes against it's own it's support dwindles exponentially. There are no governments without citizens

Pic related should sum it up

The US government interned thousands of its citizens without due process... at least twice. You tell me that the government will always be on your side.

There won't be a civil war. This entire conversation is fantasy.
Again, it's a ridiculous idea, brother, and mom won't be home for hours. Maybe I could be your Militia tonight...?
>run out of missiles
???

>You already don't have the means to protect yourself, what the fuck is actually your point?
the point is that it is my fucking RIGHT asshole and I will not relinquish it to the people with the bombs... jesus you are thick as shit

New optic and stock spacer also

>Let's all get our political opinions from betas on a board that is mostly used for furry porn
I really hope you gungrabbers on Sup Forums and Sup Forums
are just shitposting.

>Obviously, whatever food the people have must be well-balanced, so the government must regulate it.

"But just because you have an individual right does not mean that the state or local government can’t constrain the exercise of that right."
-President Obama

A "regular" militia, as has been said here , is one that is functioning properly and well.

It's like the use of "regular" to describe a GI tract that is functioning well to provide a body with nourishment.

Words change their meaning over time, and that "gay" means homosexual today doesn't mean that all those old Hollywood movies where people sing about being "happy and gay" are somehow a celebration of their homosexuality.

So read with that understanding, the Constitution and Second Amendment counsels us that a well-armed, well-trained, prepared to fight *populace* is absolutely essential for the existence of a free America.

Which is why the oligarchy is working so hard to destroy it.

The wealthy who would enslave us are our common enemy, and have always been.

Who determines "the greater good"? Certainly not the citizens interned during WWII or those arrested without habeas corpus during the Civil War.

The point is anytime somebody suggests not selling guns to people on a no fly list because terrorism, you have to bring up the us gov't and tyrany. Like they're related. Like anyone has actually proposed taking any weapons from anyone. Look at the 4 proposals that failed this week, and the pointless one that passed.

>/k/... A magical place

>Kek
You'really dumber than I though. You realize but hurt isn't protected, nor did I say it was. So mad and so stupid, thas dangerous. What the fuck does political correctness have to do with anything I said. We have the right to press, I can't publish that John Smith is a convicted pedophile, unless he is a convicted pedophile. Clearly you have an agenda, don't process facts, and just filling the gaps with SJW, cuck, and whatever the next buzzword is. Congrats, you are cancer. I bet you have a Guy Fawkes tattoo.

If I were you, I'd sell that Bushnell and get yourself a dot from Primary Arms. Cheap, and very tough. My newer AR builds wear them, and I've yet to have a problem. Nice rifle!

I am

If it helps the gun fetish fags feel good about themselves who cares?

>but don't think we have free speech because we lost that shit when "political correctness" became standard

is this faggot serious?

Nobody is trying to take your rights.

Republicans are always so dense.

You will have the right to bear arms, but only after passing a mental health check that proves your loyalty to the US and confirms you will not use your weapons to commit any mass murders.

But, nobody is trying to take the guns away from law abiding citizens.

He's young. He thinks free speech means he can go talk to people Irl like he does here with 0 repurcussions. He will learn.

you do realize that i know someone who has been on this "no-fly" list... never mind that she is a 60 year old punjabi woman with no "terrorist ties" and has been an american citizen for decades

this story has come time and time again....and only idiots like you don't seem to understand it. people can be put on the FBI no-fly list without due process.... so put gun restrictions on that list and BOOOM... you have now found a way to refuse a gun to anyone without due process
i guess you haven't heard of one of these so called "safe spaces" on college campuses.. where free thought and speech should be actively encouraged. tenured professors have quit their positions over SJW liberal insanity

when is us going to be a civilized country? those amendment make it look like is still at war

I'm really conflicted on the 2nd Amendment - on the one hand the libertarian in me thinks that government should impose restrictions on personal liberty only when absolutely necessary, but on the other, the 2nd Amendment was written a long time ago, and weapons have since become exponentially more powerful, so it does make sense that we need to adapt our laws to modern realities. Frankly, I think the laws we have in place right now make sense for the most part - there should be a high barrier to ownership of a 50cal machine gun, but very low barriers to ownership of hunting rifles. The problem is where we draw the line, and frankly I don't think there's a good one.

Personally I think the most sensible thing would be to limit magazine sizes - there will always be crimes committed with firearms, but if we limited magazines to 6-rounds-or-fewer (picking a random number here) we could pretty well eliminate the worst shootings without taking away anyone's ability to use a firearm for self-defense, hunting, target shooting, etc.

i can and do talk to anyone however i like... i don't credibly threaten or harass people if that's what you mean because i understand how the law works unlike you faggots.

but i say fuck jews on a daily basis. i don't whine like you on anonymous Sup Forums

Mental health checks that strip rights from anyone who has gone to war, sought counseling, has had depression, etc. It will lead to a 2nd class of citizen that doesn't have rights. The 2nd amendment is not a right that you have to prove you are worthy to receive, it's a right you already have - the constitution doesn't give you the right, it reaffirms you already have it.
And I'm not a Republican.

>A better way to look at the Constitution's amendments is to view them more as 'privelages' rather than rights.

No your wrong. The 2nd amendment is a God given right given to America by God himself. Anyone who opposes it is a serpent of Satan.

States powers are preserved in a separate amendment.

It was an example, and a bad one. I'll give you that. Rights can frequently violate each other, if that was not the case libel and slander would not exist. You cannot use speech to violate another's rights. An example would be
treason, libel, and death threats. There's 3.

It's not shitposting, it's *disinformation*.

Anyone trying to have a discussion about a politically charged topic needs to understand disinformation. To use a military analogy, disinformation is deception and prevention of communication, functioning like cognitive chaff, or signal jamming).

Don't make the mistake of believing everyone is arguing sincerely. Many are paid to intentionally impede and prevent sincere discourse.

Read this: "Twenty-Five Rules of Disinformation"
globalresearch.ca/twenty-five-rules-of-disinformation/24889

It's important to know the enemy's tactics - and that's their playbook.

Again, you only got half the point.
One of the proposals that failed this week was to disallow the purchase of firearms to anybody that has been on the FBI's terrorist watch list in the last 5 years. This would have stopped the Orlando shooter, for example.

>inb4 "the FBI would just re add everyone to the list every 5 years forever to get around this"

^ If you actually think anything like that you are a paranoid delusional fuck.

I don't think Sup Forums understands what a 'well-regulated militia' means
The gov't won't be afraid of some obese faggot with a grease-stained m9.
They'd be afraid of a trained fighting force.

This is what I mean. You have freedom of speech, but you can be sued for libel or slander. You have freedom of speech, but you don't tell cops onto suck your dick.

Nobody gives a shit if you say fuck jews. Fuck yeah fuck Jews, we agree on that at least. You're talking about something else entirely. "PC" has 0 to do with the 1st ammendment

Obama is a constitutional scholar.

I think he knows what he's talking about more than you do.

>^ If you actually think anything like that you are a paranoid delusional fuck.

Doesn't make him wrong.

no you are missing the point... I don't trust the FBI that was already watching and interviewing this guy from Orlando... or the local PD that was notified after he was turned away from a LGS talking about body armor and bulk ammunition.

but sure that one little fact of the FBI having "more reach" with the no-fly list would have prevented this.... sure. what the fuck is the point of a "federal background check" if there isn't a little cliff note that says "yeah this guy is a fucking suspected terrorist, multiple times"
you can tell cops to suck on your dick. don't be an idiot. that isn't harassment

"pc" has everything to do with the first amendment

>watch list
>due process

Pick one.

They might be paranoid and dilusional, and usually are, but without checks in power people will overstep that line. How about the the major issue of civil forfeiture without arrest that has rampant for the past 10 years. Logic would say that nobody could legally take your money, file no charges, and never give it back. Abuse of power says otherwise. It's a slippery slope when you ignore slight infringements of your rights because "they would never do that". They will, they will always do that, because they can, it's a question of how many small steps it takes to get there.

>You will have the right to bear arms, but only after passing a mental health check that proves your loyalty to the US
hahaha, I've been having a bad day but that actually made me laugh. Thanks.

For those who can't see why that statement is so hilarious, remember the ultimate purpose of the Second Amendment is to *fight the government when it becomes too tyrannical*.

So this poster is essentially saying "Don't worry, you can have your rights - which is already a joke because that implies rights are a grant from authority, when they're inherent properties of being human - as long as you prove you'll never use them."

Shill on, brother. Shill on.

The FBI was watching him, but at the time he wasn't suspicious and they stopped. The proposal I detailed would have prevented this.

The local cops had nothing. The gun shop called b/c the shooter asked for body armor, then left. No purchase, no record, no surveillance tape was saved. What can the police do about that?

The amendment was made when you could fire maybe one potentially lethal round every 15 seconds out of a dinky piano with the accuracy of an arthritic blind man, but no yeah we should totally be proud to be one of the only "civilized" countries where we have the right to gun down dozens of people in seconds because someone felt like. USA, amirite?

>Obama is a constitutional scholar.

He also gave us america, with sweet sweet Manifest Destiny. Praise Jesus.

no the "proposal" you offered is just as lame as the proposals that were struck down this week and rightfully so

eat a dick

Says the faggot on a communication mode not foreseen 70 years ago let alone 240. Maybe you shouldn't have protected speech unless it's using a quill.

I kek'd

Obama is a "Constitutional scholar" in the sense of "Know Thy Enemy."