Question about the second amendment

[Destroyer]

no, i said since we have armed forces, there's no need to own guns for the purpose of forming an armed militia

am i speaking a different language?

[uh-oh]

Yes. You are speaking the language of idiot.

The armed forces arent a militia. A militia is by definition citizens who take up arms and fight as an army. The minute its professional its not a militia anymore.

For there to be a militia it has to be made up of citizens, therefore citizens have the right to bear arms dummys

If the us army somehow gets steamrolled best believe im gonna be yall queda in the hills of appalachia making ieds and sniping any chinamen or russian i see.

[Larold]

The oldest nigga is also the dumbest

[uh-oh]

I mean syrians have the syrian army. Why would they need to arm themselves??????

[Destroyer]

yeah, im sure you will singehandedly succeed where the entire us military failed

sadly, it's morons like you having guns that makes normal people want to take away the right to bear arms

[Destroyer]

you can make legitimate arguments all day for the right to bear arms to protect oneself against people that would stand to do them or their loved ones harm. I agree with the right to bear arms. But to suggest, in 2016, that the second amendment must exist for the purpose of forming an armed militia on the fly, is just idiotic.

[uh-oh]

If you think i have aspirations of singlehandedly defeating a nations military you would be correct. If you think i thought it plausible you would be incorrect. I would just rather die fighting than be a prisoner or any of the other unfortunate outcomes that befalls the conquered.

Me owning guns to protect myself and fight a make believe war you created have absolutely no effect on your life. None. You have no right to ask me to give up the right to own them.

[Larold]

When seconds matter, the police take minutes to get there.

Protect yourselves

[Destroyer]

nor have i, and nor would i
i assume you posted before reading my above post

[~RustyGunZ~]

So destro should we be allowed guns?

[Destroyer]

i think on more than one occasion in this very thread i've made it obvious that i think that we should for the purpose of home and self defense, but not to form a militia

[uh-oh]

Why not?

[Destroyer]

its just not feasable that that need would ever arise today

[uh-oh]

Originally Posted by Destroyer

its just not feasable that that need would ever arise today

Lets go back to your make believe scenario that somehow the entire us military is finished. Every base, and all the military structure has been bombed and finished.

There will still be millions of americans, and the point of any war is control of the region whether directly or through some form of vassal scenario where they install someone to rule.

The militias would then take up the fight to reinstall america. They arent made up on the fly, they already exist in every state. Im not a part of a militia but i could then join and be given directives.

The same way an afghani villager isnt taliban. He joins and is given objectives.

The point of the taliban or al qaeda isnt to build ships and planes and come and destroy america, it is to kill the invading force, and do whatever is necessary to get the invading force to leave so you can re institute your way of life.

The militias would be no different. We wouldnt be trying to defeat russia or china or whoever, just make there governance impossible here so we could reclaim our sovereignty.

If you think that is stupid and unfeasible thats fine, but like i said, i would rather die fighting. The second amendment makes perfect sense.

[veritas]

Jude: the ability to form a militia is bc we have the right to bare arms. We don't have the right to bare arms just to form a militia. The second amendment really gives us the right for both. As one is a logical consequence of the other.

And why would we not need a militia now a days?

[uh-oh]

And hey lets say liberals get there way. The second amendment is abolished. You can still have a pistol or shotgun for home defense. Then time passes and more liberal reforms come through and we cut military spending and disband a ton of our forces because you know its just not necessary. Then some more liberal reforms go through and hey we cant have pistols anymore or shotguns because it was barbaric in 2016 but now in 2050 it doesnt make sense to own a gun we got policebots protecting us all.

Now russia or china moves.

Do you see why its a problem?

Everything is fine. Nothing needs changed.

[Chyeahhh!!!]

this wiggas gunbar pass has been indefinitely revoked

[Pharaohs Army]

Regarding gun laws-- It all seems arbitrary. And they don't enforce laws already on the books.
I don't think it's safe if any ol' citizen could buy a rocket launcher on Amazon
But it's also ridiculous and crazy that New York state limits you to a pistol with 7 bullets. As if that's enough.. if multiple home invaders come in.. who prolly don't obey the gun laws.

Gotta be some middle ground.

Like so many of these mass shooters shouldn't (by already existing laws) have had a gun at all... But, guess what. Friends and relatives gave them. Kinda hard to stop that. Unless you banned guns which is not realistic. They exist. All over.

Funny thing is gun manufacturers have made a killing from fear-mongering about Obama takin 'yer guns. Granted some Democrats agendas do scare gun owners, but it is certainly exaggerated. Gun manufacturers laughing all the way to the bank.

I'm gonna look up the exact wording of amendment#2...
I'm more concerned about #4 being decimated (too late probably)... but still a fan of all of the bill of rights.

[Useless]

Stfu witty

[Mike Wrecka]

Uh oh making destroyer look like a moron itt