I would not hesitate to burn this outdated shit

I would not hesitate to burn this outdated shit

Other urls found in this thread:

founders.archives.gov/documents/Adams/06-01-02-0045-0009
youtube.com/watch?v=7jqpG9A---U
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

bump for butt-hurt rednecks

it all ready has been

horse-shit

...

If you're American kys if not still kys

That's just a rifle. They weren't called "assault" rifles until they became full auto. Retard

Our Constitution is the greatest example of liberty on earth.

Don't you know libtrads use the term to mean anything that looks scary? ar15 isn't full auto but the libshits still call them "assault" rifles, I'm just using their own terms.

Ever heard of North Korea? those wars are dated. You won't even see the drone that strikes your retarded untrained ass. Actually you might, because the children in Afghanistan fear blue skies. Because drones have to fly on clear days, so they can easily target them.

I had no idea actually I just made that up to shitpost

The American Constitution is an outdated piece of crap that brain-dead Yanks cling onto in the face of everything that is sensible or logical. As for being an example of freedom - well, freedom for who? It sure as hell didn't provide freedom or the right to vote for the majority of people in the US (i.e. women, non-whites, etc.).

"I ask who are the militia? They consist now of the whole people, except a few public officers."- George Mason, Address to the Virginia Ratifying Convention, June 4, 1788

That is not why we revolted and you should know that. That gun took 2 minutes to load a shot that would probably miss.

Your guns won't do shit towards the real problem, which are crazy assholes who sit in the 30th floor of a casino and fire on a massive crowd 500 feet away.

"Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed; as they are in almost every kingdom of 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 bands of regular troops that can be, on any pretense, raised in the United States. A military force, at the command of Congress, can execute no laws, but such as the people perceive to be just and constitutional; for they will possess the power, and jealousy will instantly inspire the inclination, to resist the execution of a law which appears to them unjust and oppressive. " - Noah Webster

"no other way to preserve my own Life from his violence but by taking his, there, I have an indisputable right to do it, and should be justified in warding thro’ the blood of an whole army, if I had power to shed it" - John Adams
Sure sounds like he's talking about a high capacity rifle or cannon. Here is the actual document if you want to check that quote from John Adams founders.archives.gov/documents/Adams/06-01-02-0045-0009

You can't seriously say that that time or what a militia was 200 years ago has any bearing on what they look like now.


If you believe everyone shhould be equipped to fight off a tyrannical government in 2017, start advocating for the citizens right to own tanks and make yourself look like the massive tool you are

"What country can preserve its liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance. Let them take arms."- Thomas Jefferson
youtube.com/watch?v=7jqpG9A---U

We do own and have a right to own tanks, you're an idiot.

>Says the constitution is outdated
>gets replies literally confirming this
So you think John adams could see into the future? Or that he expected not to win the war without a militia

"The Constitution of most of our states (and of the United States) assert that all power is inherent in the people; that they may exercise it by themselves; that it is their right and duty to be at all times armed."- Thomas Jefferson

Yes, tanks that are lubriciously expensive and outdated and likely not in service. Tanks that wouldn't do shit up against the M1

They had cannons and old repeating gatling gun like weapons and yes citizens owned them including warships that the government would rent from the individual, the fact that we have the inherent right is why they can't stop us from buying tanks or cannons or machine guns as long as we have the money and can pass the background checks.

There should be no compromise with our rights, the right to bear arms is an inherent constitutional right not a privilege like driving, it's not up for a vote.

...

"Resistance to sudden violence, for the preservation not only of my person, my limbs and life, but of my property, is an indisputable right of nature which I have never surrendered to the public by the compact of society, and which perhaps, I could not surrender if I would. Nor is there anything in the common law of England ... inconsistent with that right." - John Adams

All of those replies are just as valid today as they were 300 years ago.

...

STFU you fuckin coward nigger

>There should be no compromise with our rights, the right to bear arms is an inherent constitutional right not a privilege like driving, it's not up for a vote.
>it's not up for a vote.
>vote
You think our founding fathers would have no issue with that?
Ever heard of the patriot act?
Or how our government literally gives 0 fucks about the constitution, and some un-trained redneck with an AR-15 won't do shit against that. Just some shit against our own civilians and children.

Fuck communist scum

>300 years ago
>war is the same
K

youtube.com/watch?v=7jqpG9A---U
"The Constitution of most of our states (and of the United States) assert that all power is inherent in the people; that they may exercise it by themselves; that it is their right and duty to be at all times armed."- Thomas Jefferson

Look at that shit, it actually starts with
>Weithe people
You sick white fucks

TO BE CLEAR. I'm not exactly saying it should be abolished. I'm saying we should have smarter laws, better background checks, mental health screenings.

If you don't see a problem when a man can own 10 guns legally that mimic AR firing rates, then use those to kill 50 and maim aalmost 600, I can't have a serious conversation with you

10/10, great argument

Those arguments are the same and just a valid as ever, all I'm hearing from you is that citizen need the right to keep and bear mini nukes or stronger anti aircraft guns.

We don't even have mandatory safety classes unless it's for a concealed carry. So we get stupid red necks that leave their loaded pistol in their night desk and are surprised when they come home to a dead 5 year old

>0.0000009257570867
sweetie, no.
try 0.009257570867

>all I'm hearing from you is that citizen need the right to keep and bear mini nukes or stronger anti aircraft guns.
That's just me following the logic of "we need guns to protect ourselves from the government".
That's horse-shit when handing out nukes is the only way to truly be "protected". That which will never happen, and that which never should.

When you get responses like "it's not up for a vote", in a country that loves to brag about freedom and democracy, how can you take that side seriously

That's not the responsibility of the government, we don't live in a communist country it's the parents responsibility to teach their children how to safely handle firearms.

I don't have a problem with the law in theory, I do have a massive problem with gun-toting right wingers who refuse to have a serious conversation about it.

>it's not up for a vote
Fuck off

i dont care either way about the gun debate but your wrong about the north korea bit. we had them in firepower, tech, manpower and supply. we flushed out their villages with agent orange and they still beat us due to them knowing the land and having better strategy. you'd be surprised at how a better strategy can turn the tide of a war.

...

>he hasn't heard of the Charter of the Forest

That gun took 15-20 secs to reload and fired 10 bullets each shot (1 .72 cal bullet + 9 .38 cal bullets).

ive never seen a picture taken with such quality and professionalism of something so fucking retarded before.

Property is literally nothing more than feels.

>TO BE CLEAR. I'm not exactly saying it should be abolished. I'm saying we should have smarter laws, better background checks, mental health screenings.
>
How about we enforce the current laws? How many Denied NICS checks have been followed up on? What about the Air Force not reporting dishonorable discharge? How about StrawNigger purchases?
>If you don't see a problem when a man can own 10 guns legally that mimic AR firing rates,
1 bullet per trigger pull?
>then use those to kill 50 and maim aalmost 600, I can't have a serious conversation with you

It's been reported that close to 100 of injured were due to the chaos and trampling.

However, I agree, un-warranted killing (murder) should be illegal

But it's not, the possibility of getting it amended is in all practicality impossible. So with it being a constitutional right and more importantly as the founding fathers called it an inherent right. The End

With how stupid people are, I see a problem with that. The right to own a machine made for killing humans shouldn't be a right at all, but a privilege.

It's too bad the NRA loves to lobby millions to keep it out of the question.

That was true. Not anymore, you don't need to worry about casualties when you can send in a UAV. Technology always changes war. Why do you think the last global conflict was historically very long ago. That isn't normal. The only reason we haven't turned them into glass is because they hold 10 mil. hostage in Seoul. Their tech is almost 60 years outdated.

OP is a God. Thanks for this post I completely agree

>calls it outdated
>Makes no arguments about why it is outdated
>does so in an inflammatory manner

1/10 bait

y'all niggas toasting in a troll bred

sage goes in all fields

The only good communist is a dead one.

how absolutely dare you call us that

>1 bullet per trigger pull?
bump stocks. 90 RPM.
>It's been reported that close to 100 of injured were due to the chaos and trampling.
So? people get trampled on black friday every year yet you don't hear me advocating the removal of everyone's legs

>Greatest democracy on earth
>"it's not up for a vote
You do realize they lived hand-in-hand with slave owners?

It was a different time and they had no way of knowing you could glass an entire city in a fraction of a second with one weapon

I could tell that just by scrolling through and seeing all the "muh gubment" memes

Well tough shit because it's a right not a privilege, your feels can't change that nor should they impose onto others in doing so.

I made plenty of points you illiterate fuck.

All i've gotten so far is that
>times haven't changed
>I'm paranoid about the government oppressing us in 2017
and
>it's not up for a vote because this really old piece of paper says so

I do respect the people actually discussing it with me

woosh

well thats fair about the drones and how politics are stopping us from doing just that. however when it comes to a civil war there are many factors that would actually turn this into a very similar situation to Vietnam.

>no formal knowledge of enemies or friendlies >no formal uniforms for the rebels
>in an attempt to limit collateral dmg, would have to refrain from heavy firepower
>to limit civilian casualitys would have to refrain from heavy firepower
>morale loss and conflict of interest in military and homeland security would cause defectors and lack of motivation to perform given orders

i have a few more to list but the point is maybe during the initial rebelion there would be drones used marking them as terrorists but after that there would more than likely be no drone use.

The right to own an AR is a human right then? Up there with clean water and freedom of speech? Okay, time to contact the WHO everyone. They'll love to hear that, April fools was 7 months ago

The second point is entirely valid, as it happens in almost every civilization in human history
>Ausfag btw

Our government would not "glass" the American people, they would be toppled over night if such a thing happened same with drone strikes, most of the military and citizenry would turn on them.

ive been to conventions to try to understand it and in my teen years ive beaten my dick to some furry stuff but honestly being a grown adult in a fur suit tied to sexual perversion is pretty fuckin autistic. do what makes you happy i just think its nuts to walk around with a specific pronoun and making woof noises.

Yes

That is the only point I come close to understanding. Yet as I've tried to make clear, there already exists a modern country that hands guns to citizens yet is completely authoritarian.

If your government wants to control you, THEY FUCKING WOULD. That's true now more than ever.
>to limit civilian casualitys would have to refrain from heavy firepower

We haven't followed that in the wars following 9/11 so I see no reason why we would in the future.

We had no fucking problem crushing ISIS and they very nearly had their own country under their control. millions of soldiers and plenty of weapons

So you agree? It's ludicrous to even assume they would try to assault their own citizens in mass? Citizens that are so accustomed to a democracy they feel there are certain things that aren't even up to a vote?

kek. Okay then

Not unless they want to get shot, we the people are the ones that drew that line in the sand and they know what happens if they cross it.

I also didn't get too far into it, but no one wants global conflict anymore. The top 1% have way more value in stock of having a lot of cheap labor on the other side of the world now. We may even see our first trillionaire this century.

At the same time I could see a global conflict this century when we run out of enough potable water, food and AI, the coral reefs dying, etc.

The only good propertarian is a slave.

An AR 15 is an assault weapon by legal definition though.
And the only thing keeping an AR15 from being an assault rifle is being semiauto only.

The ar15 is the semiauto commercial version of the M16.
Can you see why people call it one?

We the people, huh? You mean the aristocrats that wrote that fucking document? The ones that are given millions to deny climate change and stick to this 300 year old piece of paper like it's the fucking word of God. But only till the point when they aren't paid for it. As I've made clear. The patriot act, spying on your own citizens, and saving the hacks for all of your smartphones

right but if it were a civil war are you going to target rebels or start blowing up your own workforce and consumer base?

>The AR15 is an assault rifle
>except that by the very definition of an assault rifle, it isn't.

"there are certain things that aren't even up to a vote?"
Yes there are things that will not change and should not

"It's ludicrous to even assume they would try to assault their own citizens"
Saying that it won't happen is no excuse for removing our main means of preventing it, plus guns are used in America for keeping politicians in line as well as justifiable homicides.

Ask the guards DMZ separating North Korea and South Korea. The ones that just fired on a soldier trying to leave.

There's 2 reasons why you're saying this, either you're a cousin-fucking redneck piece of shit or you're a cabbage-picking communist piece of shit

this user does not suck dick for food

>will not change and should not
sure kid

Kill yourself, neoliberal.

...

were not talking about a handful of deserters or even one. you cant start blowing up your own country,workforce and consumer base with out fucking yourself in the ass.

Tyranny would not hesitate to burn you right back

There is more to an assault rifle than just full auto. the ar15 checks 2 of 3 boxes.

It's not an assault rifle, but can you really blame people for calling it one?

Oh really? Isn't that the very definition of an authoritative society? If it were so respected a right, you'd think you'd win the vote in a landslide. You'd think there wouldn't be so many people asking for change. I mean, if it is the will of the people, they should be able to shape the government as we please.

It's not up for a vote. This kind of mentality is the exact reason we aren't the best democracy in the world. Marijuana is a schedule one and are prisons are the most populous per capita in the world.

>Saying that it won't happen is no excuse for removing our main means of preventing it

I repeat, if they wanted to they could and your untrained ass with an AR-15 and a bump stock will not help you against a UAV 10,000 feet in the sky

So just to be clear here. You are a Republican (I assume) that is against state rights?

Hit and run guerrilla warfare on military bases, fuel depots including other government and banking facilities.

I'm a social liberal who believes that when a law isn't effective and does the exact opposite of it's intention, it should be brought into question.

>protect its citizens
I bet the parents of everyone with a dead kid from a mass shooting would love to hear that

>
>The right to own an AR is a human right then? Up there with clean water and freedom of speech? Okay, time to contact the WHO everyone. They'll love to hear that, April fools was 7 months ago
Clean water isn't a right

How can we have an intelligent conversation if you don't even know basic facts?

So when Hitler invaded Europe and burned 6 million do you think it was all that difficult for his soldiers to comply willingly? Do you think Mao or Stalin had a lot of trouble brainwashing his people decades ago. In the tens of millions.

Please. Every country in europe is strict on gun laws, and oppression isn't rampant. Times change.

>
>There is more to an assault rifle than just full auto. the ar15 checks 2 of 3 boxes.
>
>It's not an assault rifle, but can you really blame people for calling it one?
The Assault Rifle is a made up term, you media fellating cucklord. Ban High Capacity Assault Trucks!

>The Human Right to Water and Sanitation (HRWS) was recognised as a human right by the United Nations (UN) General Assembly on 28 July 2010.[1]
I'll admit I got a few letters wrong.

>inb4 Europe is oppressed because we cant say "gas all the kikes"

I wouldn't hesitate to put my foot up your ass if you did.

And I don't mean that metaphorically: you really would die from a ruptured colon that would be my-foot-sized.

>When the dude who wants to restrict guns knows more about guns than you do.

Assault Rifle is a defined term in firearms manufacturing. Please stop.

> (You)
>>The Human Right to Water and Sanitation (HRWS) was recognised as a human right by the United Nations (UN) General Assembly on 28 July 2010.[1]
>I'll admit I got a few letters wrong.
Do you pay for water?
Then it's not a right

I'm libertarian that's strongly for state rights, that state has turned it's self communist (unAmerican) and no longer has anything in common with the rest of America, it's a shame and has become an insult.

I feel like we're getting somewhere. I mean not in the debate, but in how much of a tool some of you are. I mean the ones with so little to go on they just get protective and spout nonsense or threats
I paid for CLEAN water.

>Did you pay for your gun?
Then it's not a right. Fuck me you're dumb

That's not OP guy