Was 2nd Amendment a mistake ?
>>1285220
for it's time or ours?
It was fairly necessary to defend the country from say, Indians
and you don't send a man to settle territory without the very best killing equipment.
Now is it a mistake in our time? Debatable. It has it's perks though.
If you think it was you're either pretty ignorant of history or literally evil
>>1285220
No one cares
SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED
>>1285220
The Constitution was written soon after the Revolution. During that war when the new government had difficulty providing soldiers joining the ranks of the Continental army with weapons, soldiers often brought their own. These were muzzle-loading muskets, difficult and time consuming to re-load and highly inaccurate compared to today's military rifles. It was on this level of technology that the Founding Fathers based the 2nd Amendment: a militia that was dependent upon its soldiers to provide their own weapons.
240 years ago, quite the opposite.
Now, yes
>>1285283
So it's now obsolete and does not fit with our time?
>>1285288
Had the mad shooter been carrying a Kentucky long rifle the results would have been ever so different.
Yes, the Constitution should be amended accommodate the development of a modern society--as it was amended to deal with slavery and women's rights.
>>1285220
How is the proletariat supposed to seize the means of production without arms?
>>1285298
High ground?
>>1285220
Nah
The idea of use of a specific type of technology being a fundamental right doesn't make sense. Every other instance of fundamental rights deals with the intrinsic human condition and as long as we remain what we would understand to be 'human' these wouldn't change. The idea that a person should be free to express themselves, to associate with others, etc would be true for all people in all places and in all times. Technology on the other hand evolves and changes rapidly, and is a means. We know that for the foreseeable future, being a human will be the same thing regardless of technology or changes in environment, but what a 'weapon', a 'firearm', or an 'armament' will be 300 years from now, we can hardly imagine or even clearly understand how we will make the distinction from 'non-weapons'. We're already there when it comes to things like nuclear weapons for example, which are surely armaments but what sane person believes that having one should be a fundamental human right?
>>1285295
Muzzle loaders / Kentucky Long Rifles / personal arms of the period weren't as slow and cumbersome to them as they are to us. They were seen as equivalent to military arms of an infantryman. You talk like the FF saw them as obsolete when they wrote it.
>>1285220
The Constitution was written soon after the Revolution. During that time the American people were banned from speaking in large numbers and communication was censored or outright banned. We are talking town meetings which were difficult to organize and mail that was time consuming to first manufacture and then send. Nothing like the internet we have today. It was on this level of technology that the Founding Fathers based the 1st Amendment: A people being able to freely exercise their speech on parchment and or in person.
>>1285295
There are already a lot of regulations in place. Most firearm kills in the US are done with illegal weapons.
>>1285327
As you points out free speech did at their time have far drom the same capicity to spread hate and lied as it does today, which gives me the conclucion the 1st one also is outdated.
>>1285321
It's not a specific technology being a right. It's the right to bear arms. Arms simply being weaponry, any type.
>>1285295
I bet you could kill 50 unarmed people in a nightclub with a saber, six flintlock pistols and a kentucky long rifle.
>>1285220
Obviously the idea has issues, but I wish that we would actually HAVE COMMUNITY MILITIAS and to own a gun you have to get training with the community militia and show up a few times a year to prove gun proficiency and training.
I feel like the whole purpose of the gun thing being kept was so the people had power over an oppressive government, and that's somehow turned into our gun culture.
>>1285343
And 'weapons' are a specific type of technology. Are you illiterate?
>>1285295
> if he had a black powder weapon
then he'd just made a fuckton of pipe bombs and threw them into the crowd, ormade a really big one and brought the entire place down.
>>1285220
Not really.
The big problems in the US like shootings are a direct result of tremendous societal ills: immense social and economy inequality, terrible poverty, corrupt government and a broken healthcare system.
Repealing the Second Amendment is pointed at as an easy solution because it is just that - it won't improve anything though. People don't care enough to actually fix the real problems.
I still can't believe there are people out there that still do not know what "shall not be infringed" means
>>1285400
What point do you think you're making?
Gun violence is a meme
The root cause of the violence is not the guns
The root cause of the violence is drugs and gangs
You can even look at the split through a racial lense, non-Hispanic whites do not have large drug or gang problems, and as such have a homicide rate that is pretty much on par with the rest of the developed world
But then you look at the Hispanic homicide rate and suddenly It starts getting bad because of the gangs that Hispanics are involved in throughout the Southwest
Then you look at African Americans and their homicide rate is pretty much as bad as Africa itself because of all the drugs and gangs in the Inner-city ghettos of every Major American city
Also 90% of gun murders are done with Handguns, and only 4% are done with Rifles.
These mass shootings you see in the Media - the ones that use "high powered assault weapons that were designed to kill people" - they are statistically irrelevant to the gun problem at large. These mass shootings are hyped up by the media to manufacture resentment for them so that people are willing to sign off their rights to own them with "Assault weapons bans".
>>1285220
It wasn't.
For the early union. The Militia = THE Army of the United States. There were very few regular units in the babby US, namely the very tiny US army, the US Navy, and the United States Marine Corps. In times of war, each US state was to conduct a general muster of all arms bearing men to form a Volunteer Regiment/Army, and lump this with other states to form the US military on the field.
The basis of this system was to prevent the existence of a standing army. To the early US, it was something to be feared, standing armies, as they were seen as tools of kings and tyrants, not to mention can enable a very ambitious general to seize power. However it had its proponents among the veterans of the continental army and the short lived Legion of the United States among USA's founding fathers, and pointed out that "hey, the rest of the world will soon have standing armies. If we dont have one of our own we'll be fucked," So a compromise was reached in that a small standing army will be kept while the mass shall be provided by armed citizens mustered and organized per state.
Anyway, if you're Eurobenis, OP, this therefore made firearms a very vital part of American culture. Ameriga's choice to have such a law should be understood and respected as America should respect the cultures of other countries.
Also I like guns.
>be American
>get shot
>be British
>get arrested for using a knife to make your toast
Pick your poison
>>1285432
There is a difference between a bunch of hoodrats offing each other in the ghetto and someone shooting up a bunch of white children in a school.
Fuck off with this "well their lives are just numbers in a statistic" meme, nobody gives a FUCK if niggers die, not even liberals do. But why the fuck are betacuck losers allowed to off our children? Why are FUCKING ISIS MUDSLIMES allowed to buy guns?
>>1285463
Because the moment you do that = the moment you start marginalizing groups of peoples' rights in a supposed system where everyone is equal and innocent til proven guilty.
>>1285466
>everyone is equal
it's a nice meme though
>>1285466
>everyone is equal
KILL EGALITARIANS
>>1285283
Lol you're Fucking retarded. They had something called a pickle rifle that was a repaesting air rifle used to hunt buffalo and shit. The US looked into purchasing them but they were too expensive. It's not outdated at all your just retarded and don't like having human rights. By your standards the whole bill of rights is outdated.
>>1285463
Why don't we ban doctors honestly they kill 300k people a year by making mistakes that's 30x the amount of people killed by guns
>>1285463
Why are you allowed to freely state your opinion without being imprisoned or executed.
>>1285427
Shall not be infringed is the point I am making
>>1285220
No. The private ownership of firearms is one of the few things left that separates adults from children. These last vestiges of independent adulthood in a society where people are increasingly dependent on the state, directly or not, are worth any number of deaths.
>>1285493
>Why are you allowed to freely state your opinion without being imprisoned or executed.
I am not.
>>1285502
This pretty much sums up the issue right here.
The world is a scary place, and there are dangerous things in it. You can be an adult and take responsibility for yourself, or you can be a child and beg daddy Fed to round off all of the sharp corners so you can run around blindly without fear of harm.
>>1285473
>>1285470
Before the eyes of the law. Or at least, that's how it was supposed to be.
>>1285456
>be Swedish
>get arrested for self defense
Fug
>>1285510
Ones freedom ends where anothers rights begin,With smoking bans is very easy to see how that works, I don't know why is so difficult to grasp with gun control.
Do they not teach ethics and logic in american schools?
>>1285516
Smoking bans are retarded and the risk of second hand smoke isn't nearly as big as you think it is.
But even if that weren't so, my owning any number of small arms does nothing to infringe on anyone else's rights.
>>1285510
I'd rather have public police than lynch mobs and posses commanded by the sheriff. Police are bad enough when it comes to legal arrest and they do the thing professionally.
Is the second amendment derived from Hobbes' description of the State of Nature? That in the case someone does decide to take the risk of being brutish and nasty and in short breaking terms of the social contract between the other members of society, that everyone else has the right to defend themselves as an individual?
Guns or no guns, America has some kind of dysfunction which leads to mass shootings. Gun control wouldn't fix the problem entirely, it would only be a bandaid which would lower the amount of casualties per shooting. But going the opposite way is retarded as well, the fact that some people think everyone in a civil society being armed is the way to go is just silly. It's not the guns, stupid; it's the society. If you lived in a society where respect, care, and families are thriving, you wouldn't need guns to protect yourself.
>>1285356
Multiple variants of weaponry can be considered multiple variants of technology, while yes, they do stem from the same source, the difference between a howitzer, a bolt-action rifle, a semi-automatic or self loading rifle, a revolver, a semi-automatic handgun, a grenade launcher and a machine gun are not one and the same. They are firearms, and all handle differently, and are all made differently, much like the difference btw Christianity, Judaism and Islam, they have different rules and regulations for each because they are not the same, although some of the things in them are similar.
>>1285463
sjw false flag pls go
>>1285483
A pickle rifle... lol.
I highly doubt the founding father's planned that the average settler in the west would have a pickle rifle.
>>1285238
>the 2nd Amendment is about personal protection
Wew lad
>>1285530
Someone's right to live or right to safety surely.
>>1285754
My owning firearms does not infringe on the first thing and a right to safety simply does not exist.
>>1285483
Either bait or your actually retarded.
>>1285238
>to defend the country from say, Indians
As opposed to being necessary to seize their territories. Kek
>>1285248
>mfw based class war
Those were the days
![lynxafrombaugean[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/vphD5RC.jpg "lynxafrombaugean[1].jpg")
>>1285283
They could also purchase cannons and warships
The problem is that the people who need guns to actually defend themselves aren't the ones who have them. They're in the hands of those who would commit atrocities, i.e. poorly educated racist whites.
Any kind of revolt against the US government by NRA supporters would be similar to the militarist uprising that started the Spanish Civil War. Make no mistake, gun rights advocates have no interest in freedom or equality. They're only interested in justifying their hobby with those ideals. I could make a proclamation that only REAL Americans own high powered vacuum cleaners and these people would be rushing to buy vacuum cleaners.
>>1285220
Despite what people ITT and elsewhere may believe, the second amendment was created in order to ensure the ability of the American people to fight and overthrow a tyrannical government. It was not created for individual home protection. The founding fathers included that amendment so we could fight against them if they became corrupt.
The government doesn't grant the people rights, the people grant the government the privilege of governing. A privilege that can be taken away if the situation calls for it.
>>1285498
Are you retarded?
>this sheet of paper shall not be infringed
>why?
>this sheet of paper says so
>>1285251
>guys guys guys, I think that inbred rednecks 300 years from now may not be educated enough to interpret an ablative absolute
>>1285220
In my opinion no, I think that it makes a lot of sense. The major issue is that the grammar and the term "to bear arms" has been misinterpreted to mean "anyone can own any type of gun they want," which is honestly absurd. I blame the Warren court.
On the linguistics of the second amendment:
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=http://www.english.illinois.edu/-people-/faculty/debaron/essays/guns.pdf&ved=0ahUKEwj7mOTd76fNAhVGPVIKHU5TBuoQFgggMAI&usg=AFQjCNEP9aSfYxTnr9CmIDmXpFbPVJWN0w&sig2=2tN1IIk5zrX9uaHPqS2DYQ
To keep an bear arms is a term coming from English Common Law meaning "to equip for battle" not "to own a weapon" that the founders would have been familiar with and have made a knowing reference to:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right_to_keep_and_bear_arms_in_the_United_States
>>1285965
>muh rednecks
Try having an actual argument
The gun control debate is a red herring perpetrated by the rich to occupy the politically involved masses and keep them from taking back the wealth.
>>1285298
>without arms
>not stabbing burgeouse with kitchen knives
full plebeian..
>Sick of seeing borderline retarded facebook posts about banning guns
>Come on 4chan
>First thing I see
Seriously, fuck you guys.
>>1285220
Burgers won't stop until every citizien has the constitutional right to carry around two double clip Uzis, have a Rocket Artillery in the backyard and a small Atomic Warhead right next to the propane grill..
>>1285432
>You can even look at the split through a racial lense, non-Hispanic whites do not have large drug or gang problems, and as such have a homicide rate that is pretty much on par with the rest of the developed world
every single part of this sentence is false
![Grape-3[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/Ic3iKIw.jpg "Grape-3[1].jpg")
>>1285919
Ban assault grapeshot
>>1285516
>Do they not teach ethics and logic in american schools?
is that even a question? of course they don't
>>1285220
All the amendments were mistakes. The Constitution was perfect as intended.
>>1286057
What about the 19th amendment?
Reminder that only slaves and serfs were not allowed to own weapons.
>>1286055
Nah, they do, they just don't teach you self defense is bad as well.
>>1285283
>They wanted citizens to be as well armed as the army
>This was both so they could serve in the militia and as a check against tyranny
>Founders had in fact just won a war against a tyrannical government
>In part due to armed citizens
So at what point did the founders decide that people now should not be as well armed as the military? I didn't see an expiration date on the Constitution, is it in the Federalist papers?
>>1286040
>clips
>using ellipses
Numale detected
>>1285754
Well, it's a good thing he doesn't have the right to murder people.
>>1285220
>>1285238
>>1285283
If you think that the creators of the amendment & of the USA couldn't predict that technology would improve, you're an idiot.
protip: the correlation between firearms & homicides is negative, the correlation between people of african descent & homicide is highly positive
http://www.law.harvard.edu/students/orgs/jlpp/Vol30_No2_KatesMauseronline.pdf
>>1285283
that doesn't fucking matter what the level of technology is.
If the Syrian and Iraqi civilians were armed, ISIS would've died off before they made the news. If the germans were armed, Hitler wouldn't have risen to power and the holocaust wouldn't have happened. If the Cambodians, the Chinese or the Russia farmers were armed, the purges and genocides wouldn't have happened.
If blacks weren't armed and defended their families against KKK attacks, the KKK would have triggers a nation wide genocide.
I know a bunch of tools are gonna be like
>le constanza face le holocaust was good!
or
>but the KKK was doing God's work
Or some other predictable meme.
Either way, It's not just about tech or the government. It's about some shitty people arming shitty forces and people being able to defend themselves. The founding fathers knew technology was going to advance. They lived in an era where guns were advancing quickly and were used to take over the non-gun owning world. They were speaking on universals, and the population should be armed.
And armed population causes "small" tragedies, but prevents massive ones.
>>1286020
Truth: The Post
>>1286080
>I didn't see an expiration date on the Constitution
But hopefully you did see the fact that it was designed to be amended, explicitly for the reason that cultures evolve and circumstances change.
I actually support gun rights generally, but people who treat the Constitution like fun dies treat the Bible are REALLY missing the point.
The most effective way to stop gun violence would be deport all PoC in certain neighborhoods.
It would reduce gun homicide and homicide in general drastically. It's not a gun problem. It's a /pol/'s second favorite word problem.
>>1286116
right, but it's also very difficult to change. It's also impossible to change the first 10 amendments. Which shouldn't be changed anyway other than to match inflation of money, or to curtail extremes.
background checks and waiting periods are fine, but there should be no limits on gun ownership. If we want our country and people to be safe from whatever horrors the future might bring, they need and deserve guns. A repressed homosexual shouldn't be able to threaten out liberties.
>>1285748
I do see the mistake in what I said and I can laugh I ment puckle
>>1286104
>If the Cambodians, the Chinese or the Russia farmers were armed, the purges and genocides wouldn't have happened.
>Chinese.
Fun fact: they were armed actually.
In fact: their government armed them.
China's defensive policy during the height of the Mao Years was this: arm the whole fucking country. Each county/prefecture or even village in China had an armory, which is probably only guarded by unarmed policemen. Or just one guy with a bloody revolver. Oh and everyone knows where these armories are. They drilled for them in case bad America (and later on, bad Soviets) will come for their shit.
If the Chinks wanted to, they wouldve rushed those armories, killed the policemen with swords and knives, and armed themselves.
You know what stopped them?
>Political Stability.
That did. A lot of the Chinese peasantry remembered 100 years of Qing Decline, 1911-1928 Warlord Period, the Civil War, WWII, and Civil War II. The Chinese for the first time had peace under the PRC. So they were willing to put up with retarded economic policies or edgy youth militias so long as armies aren't battling within China.
>>1286040
I lost brain cells but if I could get some clips for my uzis that would be great all I have are these magazines
>>1286116
You're right, it is possible to change. So why hasn't there been an amendment altering gun rights?
Because the truth is, only a vocal minority of Americans oppose guns
>>1286116
You know what the bill of rights is right? The first 10 rights are the only 10 amendments that can't be changed. They are guaranteed rights that no one can decided if I'm allowed to have them or not for me
>>1286159
>Fun fact: they were armed actually.
>In fact: their government armed them.
wrong, their shit was taken away for years. post a source you lying piece of shit.
>China's defensive policy during the height of the Mao Years
Mao only gave guns to those who were on his side during the revolution and purges. Before mao, the Chinese government has been famous for disarming it's citizens since the ancient era.
>If the Chinks wanted to, they wouldve rushed those armories, killed the policemen with swords and knives, and armed themselves.
>Political Stability.
Then they would have? You really think they were like, "Oh, our government isn't sending us food and killing us for owning books, but we'll take it, because of the stability. Look at all this stability we have lol!"
I'm surprised you even know how to read.
>The Chinese for the first time had peace under the PRC.
>watch me ignore the 45 million killed in four years to establish this "stability".
>>1286166
All I'm concerned with gun control is this:
>Who oversees the overseers?
The CIA literally already does whatever the fuck it wants thanks to secret warrants that we don't have a right to know about(til it's 40 years later and they can get away with a little hand slap).
>>1285951
>We hold these truths to be self evident...
>>1286166
Surely it is a bit more nuanced than that?
Obviously only a tiny minority of Americans oppose Americans being allowed to own guns, period.
Depending on the actual policy there is quite a lot of support for various gun control measures with the support being higher for the less extreme and trending downwards the more extreme they are.
Even somewhere like Britain doesn't have a complete ban on guns.
>>1285220
Yes.
It should have been the First. All the rest rely upon it.
>>1286179
> Before mao, the Chinese government has been famous for disarming it's citizens since the ancient era.
>Since the ancient era.
HAHAHAHAHHA. Honey, Imperial China would be /k/'s paradise. The Emperors literally told you to keep weapons and help the state's law enforcers arrest bandits. There were even private military organizations of young men who performed police work for hire to government officials or fought in wars as volunteers so they could gain recognition from the court and acquire a military rank & salary without having to go into the rigours of military academy. I could count with two fingers the moments China's emperors banned weapons ownership. And lord were they short bans. 1) The 20 year Qin Dynasty. 2) Yongzheng's ban on Weapons ownership in the late 1600s.
>45 Million Killed.
Yes, American, the famine was totally intentional. It was the PRC's plan to kill millions of its own supporters.
Can someone post the article about how Modern China thinks the American phrase “Those who give up liberty for security deserve neither” is retarded due to the century of shame." is fucking retarded precisely because the Chinks have had a shitty 19th and 20th century thanks to infighting?
>>1285951
HEHE XD THE GENIUSES OF THAT TIME WOULDN'T KNOW THAT THERE WOULD BE AUTOMATIC OR SEMI-AUTOMATIC RIFLES NOW EVEN THOUGH THEY HAD THEM TOO HEHE XD PLS UPBOAT
>>1286236
>Yes, American, the famine was totally intentional. It was the PRC's plan to kill millions of its own supporters.
To be fair, the famine was exacerbated by their policies. Killing sparrows for instance.
>>1286262
Yeah but to claim its Genocide is fucking stupid
LE BACKYARD FURNACES and KILL BIRDIES are a stupid attempt to boost the economy. Not to kill people.
Call Mao's gurags and reeducation camps the genocide bit of the PRC, but the GLF was an economic disaster.
>>1285220
>is the right for free speech a mistake? they didn't have computers or mass-media back then, they had quills & paper, everything that isn't written on paper by a quill must be banned!
>>1286171
>The first 10 rights are the only 10 amendments that can't be changed.
Uh, yes they can.
>>1286334
>implying that's a stupid question
The answer in that case is no, though.
>>1286171
>You know what the bill of rights is right?
You clearly don't.
You do understand what an "amendment" is, right?
>>1285220
No fuck off
They'll get my ammo before they get my guns
>>1286454
They can be violated. They are inalienable rights given to us by our Creator.
The government did not give us rights under the bill of rights.
Do they even teach Civics anymore?
>>1286484
>Do they even teach Civics anymore?
They clearly don't teach early US history or the difference between the Declaration of Independence and the Bill of Rights.
>>1285220
The problem with the founding fathers is that they thought they were being smart by being very vague with the second amendment so that it would not restrict gun ownership and the right to form militias.
I suspect it was intended to allow the citizens of the United States the ability to field armies that could fight a tyrannical government.
However, the founding fathers did not even have a remote inkling about modern warfare and the industrial complex it would require to field an army that could stand up to a nation state.
If we were to follow the spirit of the second amendment we would allow citizens to own tank, aircraft, stinger missiles and anything else that could compete with the destruction of a tyrannical army.
That said, it might not be a great idea to go down that route since it could turn the USA into Somalia.
>>1286505
But we can own tanks, RPG's, and even jet fighters, provided you have enough money and time.
>>1286104
That is fucking disingenuous that saying the holocaust would not have happened if the Jews were armed.
Hitler crushed the Poland uprising and they were very well armed. I doubt armed Jews would have stood a chance to the Wehrmacht.
In order to fight modern armies you need the backing of an industrial powerhouse.
The US would have won Vietnam if the Soviets and Chinese weren't giving them weapons.
And its why Soviets lost Afghanistan while the US sort of won.
Don't kid yourself. No one is going to overthrow a country with a standing military without either weapons from another country or the support of the standing military.
>>1286498
Do you really think them independent of each other?
>>1286484
Graduated last year and I can tell you civics was a fucking joke and this is coming from an upper class suburban "education."
>>1286522
Even then, you would need logistical support to keep modern arms fielded. I suspect if the founding fathers knew this, they would have put clauses in allowing militias outside the jurisdiction of the Federal powers.
Oh wait...
>>1286522
Most of us have little of either. And it's in the interest of those who do to keep it that way.
So we have to trust them to act against their self interest, which they don't.
>>1286544
To be fair, someone people thought it was a right given by God to own slaves.
Rights change over time.
>>1286484
I honestly can't tell if you're joking or b8ing or actually a retard.
>>1286532
That's just cheap and silly, neither is "independent" of thousands of years of history or plenty of other things but no they aren't the same document.
>>1286563
One says our rights are from God.
The other limits the ability of government to trample on our rights.
Yes, they are two different documents. You get a cookie. And an F in Civics.
>>1286555
It wasn't just identifying rights, even the foundation of the government and its purpose as expressed by the founding fathers was just glossed over. Hell even the whole checks and balances thing want taught in detail.
Public education is an enemy of liberty.
>>1285928
the youtube spokesperson for the NRA is Colionnoir, a black lawyer.
The Pink Pistols is a national organization dedicated to LGBTQ+ gun owners.
Korean-Americans defended their shops from looters during the LA riots with firearms.
Pretty sick of this "le all gunowners are rayciss crackers" meme
>>1286586
They're still the minority, senpai. Whoever has more guns, wins.
Plus, gun culture in most of the US is pretty white. It's as white as driving a huge ass pickup truck. You'd have to cherry pick to see otherwise or go to Commiefornia.
>>1286573
>Yes, they are two different documents
Thank you for your agreement.
>You get a cookie. And an F in Civics.
You don't strike me as someone capable of handing out an "F" in anything, sorry.
>>1286602
What's your info supporting your claims?
You know, your opponent is actually bringing forth something that isn't personal oppinions.
The 2nd Amendment is the only thing preventing dekulakization in the U.S.
>>1286651
i want to fuck that snake
>>1286676
nothing wrong with the second amendment , its Americans that are the problem
>>1286676
I wasn't aware most of the agriculture in the USA was run by small peasant landholders.
Would you be able to give me some stats to support this?
Last time I checked the US' agriculture industry was generally consisting if large landholders with generous government subsidies.
I'm not even saying I have a problem with that, that would be an entirely different discussion.
I'm saying the analogy is appalling.
>>1286697
More precisely people with melanin levels above average
>>1286706
Yeah, Vitamin D deficiency can really suck.
>>1285238
fucking retard, it's their land, you stole it. Face it you're the immigrant in your own country fucktard
>>1286759
But I was born here.
>>1286759
He didn't say anything in that post that oppose anything in your post anon.
All he said is that they needed guns to protect themselves against Indians, not that they didn't live in Stolen Injun land or not.
>>1285353
>thinking this isn't still the case
oldmemeisshiggy.png
>>1285353
>show up a few times a year to prove gun proficiency and training
fuck off
not even cops do this
>>1285463
poor drivers in the US kill more each year than guns. fuck off betacuck loser.
The Second Amendment sounds good on paper but it got hijacked by firearms manufacturers and the NRA. Small arms companies just switched their focus from governments to the consumer market. It's all about the $$$, it's a win-win situation for both sides. The NRA/companies get to line their pockets, and the consumer gets to feel like a badass and a "real" American.
>>1285516
>ethics and logic in american schools
uwotm8
>>1286781
oh christ this meme again
I think the problem is more so that Americans are crazy idiots with access to guns aplenty more than the second amendment of their constitution.
>>1285928
I only hope someday I see you in the street and you say this to my face.
>>1286807
This.
The Second Amendment is good thing because it is hilarious to watch Americans slaughtering each other on the news.
>>1285951
That's the gist of it. What, are you new?
SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED
>>1285951
Didn't Thomas Jefferson say the constitution should be rewritten every now and then to keep up with the times? Americans treat that shitty piece of paper like it's some divine text handed down from God or something.
>>1286828
But does our gun culture precede our rights, or do our rights precede our gun culture?
Is it the chicken, or the egg, motherfucker?
>>1286838
Considering our government's abuses of power, I'm just concerned with the implications.
I'd like to at least have lip service, that my personage here isn't at the mercy of the CIA.
>>1286824
So what, you can shoot him?
>>1286505
>>1286522
even the US military in all it's might numbers up to 1 million most of which are support staff and desk jockeys, and the minority that is combat arms is not exactly undyingly loyal to the federal government itself.
gun owners, even those that aren't old, fat, stupid, or cowardly fucks are billions, there's little the government could do to secure the country without nuking itself out of existance, all the production facilities, sources of revenue and supplies are far apart and for the most part private.
>>1286850
Yeah your government is total shit, just about everyone in the civilized world knows that much. Not that I have the best of ideas of how it all works, but it seems like the US is in a sore need of a big overhaul or something.
Why do Europeans always start implying their Governments care so much more about their rights than the US one?
>>1286840
>But does our gun culture precede our rights, or do our rights precede our gun culture?
I just like the way you kill each other. Keep up the good work.
![12VA-315[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/utRQGHz.jpg "12VA-315[1].jpg")
>>1286840
gun culture precedes our rights by well over a century.
We've had a frontier mentality since 1607. The first thing the English did when they landed at Jamestown was build a fort with musket slits in it to defend against attacks from the Indians as well as Spaniards. It was bolstered by repeated animal attacks, Indian wars, slave revolts, and other conflicts well before the Bill of Rights was drafted.
>>1286781
how come fucking COLT was going under a few years ago then?
>>1286919
The fact you felt the need to capitalise "Governments" would be a good start if you were asking the question honestly.
Who worships a government like it was zapped down from God?
>>1286940
because they neglected their civilian consumers in favor of government contracts.
>>1286953
so much for the consumer market having all the $$$ then.
i'm just hoping they open up the machinegun registry at some point just to see the inhuman shrieking of butthurt from the "collectors" that hoard preban autos and inflate prices by deliberately destroying some.
>>1286838
TJ was a wackjob leftie. He was not prudent in his desire for liberty.
>>1286951
>Caring this much about a single letter
>>1286759
No, they conquered it, or do you think that turkey should be conceded to Greece because they "stole" that too
>>1286968
It's not a single letter though. It is indicative of how much Americans worship institutions and faces on a mountain and bits of paper.
In this very thread there has been multiple Americans claiming the """"Creator of the Entire Universe"""" dun, dun, dun!!!! blessed their little bit of paper and their "Government".
>>1286997
the government is not the state
the government serves the state
nope
>>1286997
I am not even an American though.
>>1287004
>caring this much about a word!
I apologise.
You just worship "The State" dun, dun, dun!!! and little bits of paper and faces on a mountain and claim the """Creator of the Universe"""" magicked up your "State".
>>1286962
never forget 86
>>1286062
>he wants women to vote
C U C K
>>1286935
Thanks for the actual answer.
Kind of sounds like we're on a 400-year-long binge of National PTSD from it.
>>1286967
What's wrong with being a leftwinger if you have the interest of the people in heart?
>first hillary being elected
>now this whacko muslim going ham on the gays
fuck, its going to be the 90's all over again.
>>1287022
The state is a concept, the government is an institution. I agree with you that we worship these things, but things of worship are things of intangible ideals.
The problem is that we conflate the two, and our institutions suffer. So you're kind of contradicting yourself here.
Also quit being a dick. Nobody's impressed.
>>1287022
no you faggot, you literally don't know what a government is because you're mentally conditioned to worship it yourself.
a government is temporary, a state is enduring. A state is the people, the territory, the culture AND the organization that administrates them, there will be an America even if Washington DC is nuked to oblivion.
>>1287031
To paint a strawman, many right-wingers assume that the left winger doesn't have the personal agency or faculties to actually carry it out in any way that isn't disastrous. Ironically they will preach the personal agency of individuals when it does suit their agenda with things like gun ownership though.
what did they mean by this
>>1287056
are you european by any chance? only someone with a cultural background so corrupted could have trouble with separating the concept of ruler and state.
>>1287056
>only the US has a national anthem and patriotism
I dun geddit
>>1287069
Sorry, did I interrupt your religious worship with some home truths?
>>1287054
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6b6CYHLWnyg
>>1287054
What did they mean by this?
>>1287076
You make your children pledge allegiance to country under "God" in religious ceremonies in state schools and you think that is unusual?
>>1287079
What the fuck are you talking about lmao
>>1287097
But we don't?
Oh, I get it.
Its another "European who thinks the entirety of the US is some stripmall town in the midwest" episode.
>>1287119
are you feeling ok buddy?
>>1287119
better than being ruled by some technocrat in brussels who has an arab fetish
>>1287119
You are saying it like everyone else don't do the same things with their national things.
Muslims were a mistake
>>1287144
History and humanities.
>>1287140
You are just to used with your spooks to see them
>>1287140
>nowhere near to the same extent.
please
>>1285220
it doesnt even matter...
btw, is anybody else gonna shoot themselves and / or other people on election night?
it could be a historic night for murder / suicide.
just sayin.
>>1286828
>>1286932
>>1285220
It seems simple enough
if invaded, instant guerilla warfare
Founders never expected that there would be no invasion of America for centuries and that we would mostly be the invaders of countries (but just in case)
country being full of gun-wielding nutjobs was due to the supreme court than the founders
>>1287168
>please
If you honestly don't realise that you have led a very, very sheltered American life. The indoctrination into the "cult of the USA" that exists in America is phenomenal and far outstrips anything any other developed country would do without being thoroughly ashamed.
I'm off to bed now as it is bedtime in my country and I'm not suggesting this is "your" personal point of view but can you imagine the citizens of any other country coming onto an international forum and earnestly and honestly starting to claim their specific laws and bits of paper were inspired by the Creator of the Universe Himself for example>>1286573
And I know perfectly well this isn't some fringe view in the USA.
Think about it maybe, I'm not asking you to 100% agree with me, but think about it.
>>1287256
Only because we generally don't believe in god.
If we did we would say welfare was his gift to humanity.
>>1285220
no. Restricting the rights of others to partake in activities that do not harm others and to their ability to defend themselves from those that do want to do harm is an untenable position. The US Bill of Rights is such a perfect, flawless document that I should (and in a way has) gain religious significance to people. It's like an addendum to the 10 commandments. Don't fuck with it, if you do you are an enemy of the glorious pursuit of happiness of mankind.
>>1285283
>source: my hairy unwashed bunghole
It's a bad idea if it directly leads to the harm of other people
>>1286967
>TJ was a wackjob leftie
how about you substantiate that claim, please.
>>1287256
That's fine, it's easy to accept the cult of the USA. But it's a practice specific to nationalism, to create the cult of the state, not the USA in particular. Yes, the pledge is propaganda, how is this not a given?
This is where we protest. We speak on behalf of those without that rosy vision of a state, conflated with the hefty institution of government.
>>1285295
If we're working on the presumption of early 1800's technology, then the police, if there were any, would have taken hours to respond, and around 50 people would still be dead.
>>1286522
The FAA disallows weapons from being used from aircraft. Even firing a rifle out of a helicopter is against the rules.
>>1285283
Maybe we should get rid of the 1st amendment too, because the founding fathers CLEARLY didn't intend it for an era of mass communications, nowadays information gets around way too quickly. BAN RAPID FIRE HIGH CAPACITY SPEECH!
>>1286935
That's not gun culture, are you fucking retarded? If they were arrow slits, would you say that we had a bow culture?
Gun culture is about consumerism, not defense. Gun culture is going to gun shows, going shooting at the range every weekend or taking part in the annual town hunting season, checking out the latest civilian model of insert gun here, etc.
>>1287406
>Even firing a rifle out of a helicopter is against the rules.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xq4Ph2lArPs
>>1287553
[citation needed]
"culture" is a general way of thinking and acting shared among a group of people that defines them in a way.
having prepared to use guns is a pretty fucking big indicator of a "gun culture".
>>1287256
obviously never visited Canada.
>>1287572
Citation needed for what? I'm arguing against your personal definition of culture for mine.
People have had to do the same thing American frontiersmen did for fucking centuries and humans will continue to do so, so don't give me this horseshit definition based on American exceptionalism. There's a reason you have a distinct gun culture while other cultures who used to have frontiersman culture do not have a contemporary gun culture.
Fuck you, I'm fucking angry now. What a load of shit.
>>1287605
we do have a gun culture, because we're allowed to have guns. Are you saying /k/ isn't full of people from around the world talking about their interests in guns?
Culture is a product of the environment. Just because your people lost their rights centuries ago, and it caused a whole shit ton of problems like the world wars and communist revolts, doesn't mean you can project your insecurities onto actual free countries.
>>1287553
>Gun culture is about consumerism, not defense
If you don't understand the obvious relationship between defense preparedness and gun culture you really shouldn't comment on it.
>>1287652
Gun culture is to home defense what Christ is to Christmas - for most people there's just no link anymore.
Is it that hard to admit that gun ownership is by and large just a glorified hobby that people pretend is actually about patriotism? It's getting really old now. I own a nugget because I'm a Red Armyboo but I'm not going to make any excuses for it.
>>1287724
what are you talking about?
plenty of people buy a glock or a ruger lcr just to shove into a purse or put by their bed just to feel safer.
>>1287735
i'd say the number of people who buy whatever the gun store guy tells them is good for the sake of having a gun far, far, outnumbers the autismal collectors.
it's the only logical explanation for glocks.
>>1287741
yeah, the glocks whole shtick is that its a brick that goes bang every time.
>>1285750
>A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State
>>1287764
>security of the state is equivalent to personal protection
Not even American, what the fuck kind of interpretation is this? It's like the exact opposite of what it says.
>>1287839
free state
state is the people first and foremost
Honest question for the more sane participants in this thread:
I seem to remember 4chan being (slightly) less full of self-fellating numale ledditor cuck faggots. Is it just a property of /his/, or is it summer, or are they just coming out of the woodwork lately for some reason? All of the above? I keep seeing completely unironic commie faggotry everywhere lately and it saddens me, since I come to imageboards to get away from that shit.
>>1287860
/his/ has always had more left influence due to /lit/ migrating over along with /leftypol/ shitstains. They usually make asses of themselves and skeddable before getting torn a new one.
>>1287853
I'm guessing they don't teach Civics in American high schools anymore.
>>1287860
Are you complaining about this board not being an echo chamber or something?
>>1287860
>>1287872
This isn't /k/, faggots. Just because some people on /his/ don't join the hivemind that is American gun ownership doesn't mean we need to pander to your delicate sensibilities.
Reminder that anyone who uses the term "nu-male" or "cuck" is a newfag /pol/tard who can't even remember /new/ and the Stormfag era.
>>1285220
Not in any sense of the word.
>>1286781
>A lucrative deal for both the business and the consumer
>In keeping with both God given rights and the highest law of the land
Explain to me how this is anything but amazing, Michael Bloomberg
>>1287884
i'm not even American, we respect gun rights over here too.
i'm smart enough to understand that if fuckheads like you have it your way we will lose them before they do.
>>1287889
b-but big corporations!
and guns!
scary, bad!
>>1286838
We acknowledge that you can change the Constitution any time you want. We've done it quite a few times.
Have fun convincing a vast majority of Americans that they don't really have a right to guns
>>1287872
>/leftypol/
>outside of containment
Dear God.
>>1287876
Diversity of opinion is great. Diversity of idiots is not. I'd rather deal with niche morons who are just being contarian than morons who only *think* their opinions aren't mainstream, and who I have to deal with in public all the time. I come here to get away from commies.
>>1287884
>Reminder that anyone who uses the term "nu-male" or "cuck" is a newfag /pol/tard who can't even remember /new/ and the Stormfag era
Guilty as charged. Teach me the wisdom of the ancients, senpai. I'm sure it's not identical to the wisdom of filthy goon scum. Also, I'm sure you neeever throw around dumb overused buzzwords to virtue-signal for kicks, no siree. Not on 4chan! That is solely the province of /pol/-tards. :^)
>>1287919
>Not on 4chan! That is solely the province of /pol/-tards
Where do you think we are? Of course I fucking throw around buzzwords, you faggot. See, right there. Faggot. The most glorious word in 4chan history.
But there's a big difference between faggot and "nu-male" or "cuck". Faggot was never used to denigrate actual homosexuals. 4chan culture has always been contrarian and edgy, but never to the point of radical politics. That's why Stormfaggotry and /new/ were publicly banished from 4chan, because most people saw it as a negative influence. Imagine that, an imageboard where people call each other niggers and faggots couldn't stand a bunch of actual white nationalists. What a far cry from today where you can find /pol/ leaking into every board. Hell, even fucking /ck/ and /trv/ aren't safe anymore. It's honestly fucking annoying as fuck but I'll deal with it.
I just wanted to call out newfags that try to lord it over even newer newfags.
Fact: 93% of shootings are in gun free zones fact : Sweden has no gun restrictions and is one of the safest countries in the world Fact: France has extremely strict gun laws, many shooting. With this in mind look at the facts. A shooter is going to shoot a person who can't defend themselves. As an American you cannot simply infringe upon our rights, because time have saved more life's then they have wrongly taken. Also weapons are for hunting, a pastime and way of survival for hundreds sense the beginning of time we have hunted. Now I ask you, do you want officers of the law to carry firearms? If you say yes then why not have a civilian who regularly practices and knows gun safety own a firearm? When was the last time criminals followed the law so what would creating a law do to stop criminals
>>1285220
When it was written it was necessary.
50-100 years ago it was a right to own a weapon.
Now, it's still a right to own a weapon, but assault/automatics are a debatable topic. While my brain says "restrict sales on assault rifles and high-caliber automatic weapons," my pure American blood says "don't change anything."
I think we should just leave it up to the states and/or counties. I can see just about every midwest state allowing it but high density areas seeing no need for it.
>>1287942
Assault rifles and high calibre automatic weapons are already restricted as of May 19th, 1986.
>>1287932
>anti-white-nationalist fag is nostalgic for the days when a foreign culture wasn't invading his formerly homogonous community and changing its core values
Like pottery.
>>1287942
I think that's a good way to put it
Deep down I know our gun laws are absolutely retarded but they're OUR gun laws, goddamn it
>>1285463
Ask the FBI; he was investigated by them twice.
>>1287955
I could see the irony if I were an SJW but unfortunately that's not the case.
It's not really a foreign culture, it was just a niche subculture in the way that /jp/ or /o/ are. However, /jp/ would never wage a Kulturkampf to spread its culture to other boards. So moot banished the Stormfags and much later gave them a second chance with /pol/, hoping it would be a containment board. Of course, /pol/tards are incapable of not using the same tactics they accuse Commies or Muslims of using so they began the second Kulturkampf to conquer 4chan.
Judging by the current state of 4chan, /pol/ is winning. But a few years down the line, someone else will take the place of white nationalism and Trumpism. Hell, if Trump wins the election then the contrarian thing to do would be to shit on Trump and alt-right values.
>>1287955
Why do /pol/acks assume everyone who are against them are anti-white?
Heck, even those who don't fully support them are anti white.
>>1286003
>To equip for battle
So shouldn't that mean the average swinging dick can buy pretty much anything he wants if he has the dosh? Fully automatic weapons, handheld explosives and rocket launchers have been the gold standard in infantry warfare for the better part of a century now.
>>1288002
Ehh, I'm just 'avin a giggle, m8. You seem pretty chill.
I'm honestly not even a /pol/fag anymore, and I totally agree that they take themselves way too seriously and overstep their bounds. But to me, they're "the devil you know", so to speak. Who knows, though, you may be right, and they might actually succeed in their meme-warfare and become mainstream, at which point it will be my sacred duty as an imageboard contrarian to mock them at every opportunity. But until then, if you get to complain about the old days when there weren't any Stormfags, I get to complain about the days when there were slightly fewer edgy communists.
>>1288014
As I told the other anon, just having a laff. Well, okay, maybe it was only semi-ironic shitposting. Still. I guess I just wish anons would try to use their brains and be reasonable instead of engaging in all this Weimar-esque gang scuffling between edgy rightists and edgy leftists. But that's never going to happen, is it?
>>1288051
delet this
>>1288050
We can always look to our lord and savior to find ways to solve it in.
>>1288065
I look forward to the surreal experience of having Stalin become the new Hitler for memeing purposes. He's got quite a hill to climb, though.
>>1286104
Hitler was elected. If the krauts were atmed in the 30s it wouldn't have changed a thing.
>>1288121
Hitler was elected by 33% of the votes.
the communist militias in Germany would have stopped the SS if they had been as brutal as them.
No. Require people to put safety locks on their weapons when they arent packing. Outside of that, weapons can be picked up by people on the black market.
Notice that all mass shootings happen in public schools or leftist bars and not texan rodeos or kkk rallies. Further dis armament would only result in more deaths.
>>1287876
I find it fascinating that people think that deleting pol would make the right wing element go away rather than more severely migrate to the rest of the site.
>>1288204
gun safes are required in a ton of states though.
gun ownership simply isn't the problem, mental health, security checks and procedures are flawed.
they are ineffective at providing safety and instead only serve to abuse and restrict the rest of the population
>>1285220
People forget that the US Constitution doesn't give people the Right to bear arms. It observes they were born with such Rights, and it builds a framework of law to recognize that fact. You cannot take my Rights from me. You can kill me, maybe, but I will not live like some worm-eating North Korean in a cage. There is only one reason a Government disarms a people... and it is not because they love them and care about their well being. If the Government wanted to save our lives, they would ban swimming pools, or better yet, alcohol.
Now, if you try to ban guns, people like me won't comply. What happens next? Well then you use your big bad military right? Well you see, the thing is, they are not really "your guys" are they? They are not a Liberal group. In fact they are about as Right wing as a people get. Veterans are even more powerful as a group - and they are more Right wing still. Who is going to come and "get my guns?" No one.
But honestly, I would like to see the Starbucks crowd try to disarm me. In the chaos that follows, we can transform this country back to what it was suppose to be.
>>1286092
>>1286179
That was a brutal slap down.
>>1285220
No fuck face I don't like guns or own them but I'm sure as hell glad I have the protected right to get one.
