>Not from US so I have no one to really say this to, but isn't the gun debate missing the whole point of the 2nd amendment?
The States colonies were a response to the corruptness of government, the 2nd amendment made sure citizens could protect themselves from it if necessary. This militia doesn't exist right now in the US.
"Arms" should be interpreted as "latest technology" imo, right? Not fucking guns? wtf is a ar15 going to do against a tank, or a drone strike for that matter
So why the fuck aren't real "Patriots" that US is so famous for not actually making the correct argument anyway?
There was no formal militia at the time. The "militia", then as now, is the people. The citizenry.
Joseph Long
So if you can't read it says "the right of the people to keep and bear arms" meaning it is the fundamental right for all U.S citizens to own a gun if we so please we can also own tanks and drones that are 100% functional (very very expensive) and i have no idea if you noticed but the Viet Minh/Cong, Colonial Americans, and terrorist cells have been able to put up a fight without all this fancy shit and there are several militias out there
Dominic Wilson
It's like quoting the bible, it's written in the 1800s and has no bearing on a people that are going to interplanetary colonization worrying about changing the planets climate.
Those guys were just hoping not to die of athlete's foot.
Aaron Hughes
Because the corporate media owners don't allow the news to say it.
Camden Sanders
An ar15 won't do shit in a straight up 1on1 with a tank. But used in guerilla warfare, an ar15 will do wonders.
Fuck 'em. We live in tyranny daily. At this point gun ownership is lethal fetishism.
Justin Ross
>response to the corruptness of government No, they were a response to being subordinate to absentee imperial rulers. >the 2nd amendment made sure citizens could protect themselves from it if necessary Kek, no, the 2nd Amendment existed to protect private property (including slaves) from people who did not respect the artificial tradition of private property (including slaves). >This militia doesn't exist right now in the US. They don't even need to. The professional police have taken over the role.
Josiah Long
what the fuck is a musket going to do against a Royal British Navel ship?
Wyatt Moore
Patriots often do say that, including bringing up historical examples of the continental army borrowing warships and cannons (the pinnacle of arms at the time) from private citizens during the war. You’re just looking in the right places if you want to see it for yourself.
Easton Russell
Found the cuckold
Gavin Mitchell
Kill the captain. Then it is mass confusion until a new commander can be found.
Aaron Carter
this. only this.
Samuel Bailey
A private citizen should be able to own a tank and a drone.
Jason Sullivan
Gun owners are cuckolds? What universe are we in? Did another overlap ours while I slept?
No they were upset about taxation without representation.
Self, private property Same thing.
Police, militia same thing
Are you high son?
James Walker
>So why the fuck aren't real "Patriots" that US is so famous for not actually making the correct argument anyway? They are, but our media is liberal so the only time you'll see a conservative on air is because he was handpicked due to his incompetence or stupidity
Austin Nguyen
Comparing a musket to a royal british ship is like asking what a banana would do to an m1 abrams
Absolutely. Cucked by gun manufacturers and their lobbyists to believe that guns are an identity, and that you stand any chance of uprising against the government. Not all gun owners are cucked. There's some who just like to shoot, and want to be able to defend themselves against shitty people. But there's a lot of cucks.
Yes, they're the commodity fetishists Marx warned you about, assigning religious significance to a weapon.
>No they were upset about taxation without representation. >actually believing what they said overrules what they actually did Kill yourself, neoliberal.
> This militia doesn't exist right now in the US. Militias are not permanent organizations. They are formed by citizens in response to a need.
> "Arms" should be interpreted as "latest technology" imo, right? Not fucking guns? Citizens may own weapons. This is deliberately open-ended because the founders knew that technology would progress.
> wtf is a ar15 going to do against a tank, or a drone strike for that matter You can in fact own a tank. This "how do you fight tanks with guns" argument is a common red herring from those who misunderstand the premise. The government cannot actually use bombers and tanks on their citizenry in the way you're imagining in a first-world nation. Tyrannical third-world nations where wealth is dug from the ground and seized directly can get away with doing that, because the only infrastructure they need is a road from the mine to the vault. But in a first world nation your wealth comes from the education, infrastructure, and productivity of your citizens enacting in massive amounts of mutually beneficial trade to add improved value to the raw goods produces by those third-world nations. Blowing up your own cities is just cutting your dick off. Now you aren't collecting taxes, can't pay your own troops, can't maintain your vehicles, your tanks and bombers are fifty million dollar paperweights, and your troops are coming down to your house with their guns to get the paycheck you owe them. You know, instead of driving that tank down their own street to knock on their own wife's door with it. You can't fight your citizens in a first-world nation with the tools you're talking about. So it comes down to the willingness of your troops to shoot their friends and families in their own homes as opposed to you, the corrupt politician ordering them to. And the willingness of the people in your cities to oppose those soldiers with their own guns and then come get you, the corrupt politician.
Dominic Bell
>why aren't people that could correct everything and not use fear to drive consumers, in power with the ability to change things?
Really? Is that really your question?
Jaxson Thomas
Are you talking about NRA ads? Shit's hilarious.
Elijah Gray
He's right. Who else benefited from 'OBAMA'S TAKING OUR GUNS' when none of that happened or ever was going to happen.
the media isn't an accurate representation of the real issue? It's like they want everyone to draw the conclusion americans are children who can't be trusted with guns
Nicholas Jones
the militia existed to put down slave rebellions and fight off indian attacks.
Zachary Adams
So you're smarter then every Supreme Court Justice since 1789? That's amazing! What is that like?
Leo Murphy
Honestly, all of the targets the musket could hit. Unless you get a lucky shot at a predator drone, ala Jason Bourne, you're fucked.
A well regulated militia is needed, which is what the US Army is.
Charles Hill
Correlation does not equal Causation user. This looks to me like every time liberals call for banning guns or other authoritarian laws, people go out in fear and buy weapons. You can keep assuming Obama wanted the US populace armed more if you like, I'll keep calling you retarded.
everything you said is wrong and poised to start useless arguments
Noah Cruz
Make a nigger president and suddenly it's like everyone rightly fears for their safety. Now they riot in their streets and burn their own cities. And they expect that to make us think their lives matter, instead of being proof that they matter a negative amount?
>This is called the "insurrectionist argument," and it has never been right. That is called the "revisionist history", and we will always have been at war with Oceania.
Parker Morgan
why would they want to do that right after the histories highest recorded gun sales?
I suppose finding a way to sell one gun twice could be pretty profitable, but more than the cost of returning them all?
Colton Johnson
> Maybe you should go read the Militia Act of 1903 again, junior. Militia Act of 1903 is unconstitutional because it infringes the second amendment by trying to redefine control of the militia from the people to the government. The right of the people shall not be infringed.
Adrian Thomas
>Militia Act of 1903 is unconstitutional because Stopped here.
Oh okay. I guess that means that we did great in Vietnam and that we are currently kicking ass and taking names in the Middle East. Thanks for clearing that up.
Owen Hernandez
It's regularly posted on Sup Forums, hence the SS. They got fed up with arguing I guess.
The Tree of Liberty grows best when watered from-time-to-time with the blood of Tyrants and Patriots,
Owen Harris
>I'll take 'Shit That Was Never Actually Said' for $500
Colton Young
Guess Mason was wrong about the militia too? Try reading the Federalist Papers and the writings of the Founders some time.
Brody Lewis
Well regulated at the time meant operating as it should be - aka armed, and ready to go. Look up the meanings of words from the 1700s. Some have changed and it means a lot - like awful used to mean full of awe (amazement), now it describes something bad.
Jacob King
Because letting regular people have tanks and drones is an even more retarded argument.
Its the job of the supreme court to interpret the constitution.
Carson Long
I want this as my desktop wallpaper.
> Because letting regular people have tanks and drones is an even more retarded argument. ...but regular people CAN have tanks and drones. Here, milweb.net/classifieds.php go buy one.
Ryder Russell
This picture is so fucking stupid and disproves its own argument. The Musket could kill someone with a cannon or on a ship fairly easily. But an AR-15 isn't going to have a snowball's chance in hell of destroying a tank or a fighter jet.
Also, the Brits had to travel across an entire ocean on wooden ships before they could even get a chance to fight the Americans. While the Americans just waited for the Brits to come and shoot them, so the Americans clearly had the advantage. Whoever made this picture is a complete retard.
Jayden Powell
See , then stop being the EU getting cucked by Muslims.
They're allowed to be armed, too. You need a special license for the larger ordinance and the cannon, but your regular gun license will let you operate the guns. Particulars vary state to state.
Not really. If the US wanted to become a tyranny, it would have absolutely no problem of becoming one. It's pretty much halfway there already and no one is doing shit about it. What the fuck are a bunch of rednecks with guns going to do against a superpower, you idiot? Not even entire countries could stop the US, so what the hell makes you think untrained unorganized rednecks could?
The irony is the Eurocucks did lay down their arms - and got sandniggered to death.
Ryder Gonzalez
Now all you have to do is convince the Muslims to lay down their weapons and AHAHAHA good one.
Brody Perez
That post made no sense whatsoever. The jap thinks the only way to control a people is through military might. Look up what psychological warfare and manipulation is before you post retarded shit. Thanks.
Ian Edwards
>Not even entire countries could stop the US Really? I'm pretty sure a bunch of Vietnamese farmers with antique rifles and a bunch of Afghani farmers with antique rifles did a pretty admirable job of stopping us. Maybe you're taking about WWII where we jumped in at the last second.
Jonathan Martin
I didn't even read this post because of how retarded the last one was. You're an idiot.
I'll take your abandonment of the point about gun control to jump topics to psy ops as a concession. You'll find my opinions of the public holding the government accountable unchanged regardless of if it's done via gun ownership or psychological warfare, but I'm happy to accept that you've given up defending your anti-gun stance and we can have the other discussion in a more appropriate thread. This one's about gun rights.
Cameron Lee
God created man, AK-47 made him equal !
Nathaniel Price
I'm personally not a fan of the current narrative in our country. I take no issue with guns or gun violence, but rather the people who push 'american ideals' when it comes to arming themselves, yet flip shit when some potentially dangerous refugees want to seek asylum in our country. We've lost our right to call ourselves the land of the free and home of the brave when we aren't brave enough to laugh in the face of potential pitfalls freedom comes with.
A country armed to the teeth is going to face tragedy, but we should be strong enough to move past it and uphold our idea of freedom. Or we need to ditch the whole freedom tag and accept we aren't responsible enough to use the ideals our country was built upon.
Jaxon Bailey
If you think fighting the British in the 18th century as they arrive on wooden boats after an ocean-long journey, is the same as trying to overthrow the world's only global superpower with Walmart guns while being surrounded by it in the 21th century, then you're an absolute fucking retard and you need to kill yourself immediately.
Connor Morris
We have the National Guard and Reserves which are essentially the "well regulated militia" now. They get proper training from actual military personnel, drill periodically and are actually useful enough to be deployed overseas and not fuck up everything the regular forces are trying to accomplish (kinda). All these spergs with their "muh freedums" AR15s could have just as much fun plinking with .22's but are jealous of the guys who get to shoot real guns but are too cowardly to enlist. If you can't legitimately defend your home with a pistol or a shotgun, you should maybe think about why so many people are pissed at you and adjust your life accordingly. Source: American gun owner.
Aaron Hill
Yeah and in all of those the US didn't have home base. It's always harder to travel to foreign lands and fight the enemy at their base. This is why the British lost in the first place. If those Vietnamese farmers went to America and tried to invade it, they would get shot so many times that they'd turn into liquid.
Bentley Watson
>we should be strong enough to move past it and uphold our idea of freedom. What are you talking about, moron? Go suck on George Soros' dick you faggot. Opening our borders is suicide to everyone but the richest people in America. Fucking Kys nigger.
> yet flip shit when some potentially dangerous refugees want to seek asylum in our country. Our "shit" is "flipped" because these refugees are not interested in our way of life and refuse to immigrate. Even the ones that aren't directly terrorists, the ones you call "potentially dangerous", are still following their culture from the nations they came from - the culture that causes those behaviors they came here to flee from. Because they don't change and don't assimilate, their problems come with them, and ruin our country. That's the actual danger. And they all present it, because they're not people who love America and want to be part of it. They're people who hate America, but have no place to go, because they already fucked up their homes and now need new ones to fuck up.
