>the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed
>the right to keep and bear automatic AR-15's with 50 round clips shall not be infringed
Even if we ignore the part about a WELL-REGULATED MILITIA, then only one of these things is in the Constitution. These weapons are a privilege, not a right, and are NOT protected:
http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2014/06/second-amendment-guns-michael-waldman
There is no reason why any American needs a weapon like this. A revolver or shotgun for defense or hunting is valid, but there is no reason anyone should have an assault rifle,
Regulate the militia all you like you illiterate mongoloid.
You still don't get to infringe on the right to bear arms.
>>81350604
That's a disgusting AR
>>81350604
>Clip
Kill yourself. Learn about the topic of guns if you wanna debate us correctly. nigger spawn.
>>81350604
The "Well regulated militia" clause strengthens the evidence for an individual right to bear those arms. Anyone that thinks differently is misinformed or has malicious intent.
>>81350604
Well-regulated, at the time, meant something was in working order.
The Militia, as far as the law is concerned, is basically everyone.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/10/311
Federalists No. 29 and 46 say the same thing, as did George Mason during the VA ratifying convention (though he used the term yeomanry, if you care to look for it).
>AR-15
>Not an arm
You basically have no real argument.
Also these two posts are correct.
>>81351005
>>81351437
>>81350604
Topkek OP. Our kids use those type of guns and there's no problem whatsoever.
Why are so fearful and paranoid?
>>81350604
>AR
>"50 round clips"
>mfw
>actual happenings happening
>cuck makes a 2nd ammendment b8 thread
What are you sliding?
>>81350604
The writers of the bill of rights intended to protect the right of Americas to resist government tyranny with effective military force.
In the 1780s that meant meant muskets flintlock rifles, bayonets, sabres, cannons and ships. In the Modern world that means Automatic and Semi-Automatic rifles,Machine guns, Armored Vehicles, Crew Served weapons and air power.
We have already given the government far more power than is wise. In American it is the people that give things to government, not the other way around. Weapons are not a priviledge that Washington grants us, they are a right that stands above the power of government. The federal governments first and foremost function is to defend the rights and freedoms of the people. Including the right to keep and bear arms.
>>81350604
>mother Jones
in the trash it goes
![Frodo Smiling[5].png](https://i.imgur.com/qrOUeel.png "Frodo Smiling[5].png")
>>81350604
>50 round
>clip
Kill yourself faggot
I love the "what was intended at the time of writing" crowd. It's like they're utterly unaware that a citizen back then could buy a ship, load it up with cannons, rifles, pistols, and melee weapons, and then get a letter of marque to go fuck up foreign merchants and steal their shit. Or just buy the ship and arm it, skip the legalized piracy, just chill with your fully armed and operational death ship.
>see clip in OP's post
>americatriggered.jpg
>/k/ikes incoming
>>81350604
>There is no reason why any American needs a weapon like this. A revolver or shotgun for defense or hunting is valid, but there is no reason anyone should have an assault rifle,
then why are they used by law enforcement?
>>81350604
Read US v. Miller, the ban on full-autos is unconstitutional due to those weapons having a purpose within a militia and if Miller were applied to the whole NFA that statute would have to be struck down.
>>81350604
>well regulated meme
reg·u·late (rĕg′yə-lāt′)
tr.v. reg·u·lat·ed, reg·u·lat·ing, reg·u·lates
1. To control or direct according to rule, principle, or law.
2. To adjust to a particular specification or requirement: regulate temperature.
3. To adjust (a mechanism) for accurate and proper functioning.
4. To put or maintain in order: regulate one's eating habits.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bsidht3X6kI
>you have the right to a gun, but you don't have a right to the trigger
>you have the right to a gun, but you don't have the right to the firing pin
>you have the right to a gun, but you don't have the right to the barrel
>you have the right to a gun, but you don't have the right to the metal of which the gun is composed
>>81353634
what's the proper term?
Magazine?
Regulated has nothing to do with regulations.
Not to mention the people are the militia.
Go get raped.
>>81351731
Because they're ignorant as fuck and don't realize a AR15 is not a cannon.
>>81350604
More important shit in the world right now man. No time for your shit tbbqf.
>>81350604
#staywoke
>>81350604
Move to the UK if you don't like it, faggot.
Well-regulated means well-equipped in ye olde English, moron.
>>81350604
>shall not be infringed except for what I don't like or find necessary.
Yeah op, kill yourself.
>>81352451
First answer best answer!
wish we had that right too.. I mean since our constitution is based or at least inspired by yours and France's under Napoleon
>>81350604
the united states is already a cuckold country with no 2nd amendment. if you want proof try and see what happens if you want to own nuclear arms.
>>81350604
why would we ignore the part about a well regulated militia, you don't seem to understand what it means!
>>81350604
The Founding Fathers intended us to have the same kind of weapons as those we may need to fight against.
Plus, all able-bodied men 17-45 are automatically considered part of the militia, and all able-bodied females 17-45 that are in the National Guard are also considered part of the militia.
>>81350604
> implying well regulated militia bs
A nutricious breakfast being a cornerstone in a balanced diet, the right of preparing and eating bacon shall not be infringed.
Now do you think it means that the breakfast has a right to bacon?
The right to bear arms is given to the people. They have the right to bear arms. One reason given is to be able to form state militias. That means that people at minimum have the right to guns suitable for a state militia. AR-15's definitely fall under that. If you think AR-15's are military grade (they aren't), then you must think normal citizens have the right to own them. The individual right to bear arms must at minimum include weapons useful for militia service. Honestly, we should be able to buy m16's.
>>81350604
>three grips
What, are we arming people in fukushima?
The first ten amendments to the constitution, also known as the Bill of Rights, specifically impose restrictions on what the government can do. Why would they put a "state's right" in the middle of that, leftists?
This clip has more rounds than OP has posts.
>>81350604
what did he mean by this
>>81350604
>clip
REEEEEEEEEEEE
>>81358732
i kekd
>>81350604
Stop sliding.
>>81358835
Don't be a retard.
The first 10 amendments weren't composed with a theme. There were something like 30 amendments proposed in the first batch of amendments after the constitution was adopted. The first 10 amemdments were simply that - the first 10 proposed amendments from that batch that passed enough states to become actual amendments to the constitution. The "bill of rights" name was applied much later.
11 of the proposed amendments from that first batch have become amendments to the constitution. The 11th one is actually our most recent amendment, it took 200+ years to collect enough states because we kept adding states. It restricts the ability of congress from voting itself pay raises.
>1 post by this ID
STOP FUCKING REPLYING
>>81360204
>The first 10 amendments weren't composed with a theme.
They were all penned by James Madison for the same occasion. How could they not have a theme? Especially one as practical as purpose?
>>81351626
haven't seen that type of chart since 8th grade english class
>>81350604
>clips
Argument ignored.
>>81350604
>clips
>>81354033
fucking this lol
>>81353634
Where's your good now?
>>81357085
Remind me why a compressed air based gun would need a striking hammer?
I don't know why, but it triggers me to no end
>>81350604
nice bait, but the supreme court has held up the right to have guns.
>>81359169
Brilliant idea except you're going to shoot the magazine, retard.
>>81350604
>>81351731
Ugh. Resting the barrel towards your body. Covering a barrel with your thumb.
Somebody needs to teach these retards how to safely hold their weapons. Maybe some sort of club or class or whatever they're in.
>>81363795
Joke's on you, mother fucker, I'll duck while I fire so that the bullet hits any enemy behind me.
>no reason
Yes there is. It's to prevent the government from becoming too authoritarian and prevent other counties from invading us, you fucking libcuck retard.
>>81365555
Finally have a reason to post this.
>>81350604
>clips
>>81366268
...he said posting breakfast foods for no reason.
>>81350604
>clips
die you stupid nigger
>>81365555
>>81366268
Liberals would probably argue that you only have the right to eat the food as part of a well-balanced breakfast.
>>81350604
Bait, fuck off shill.
>>81366586
Obviously. If the "well-balanced" part is to be disregarded why would they have added it in the first place?
>>81350604
DC vs. Heller
McDonald vs City of Chicago
You ARE the militia whether you like it or not, fampai. Thus says the Supreme Court of the United States.
>>81350604
The purpose of the bill of rights was to enhance individual rights at the expense of centralized power. Go ahead and read the first ten amendments.
And leftists still think that the founding fathers added in the second amendment to clarify the idea that militias should have guns?
Having a militia ALREADY implies that they are to have guns. Ignorant leftists are a product of shitty public education. Get lost.
>>81366268
>let me ignore the point and post something retarded
gun nuts, ladies and gents.
>>81350604
>clips
Fucking Amerifat.
>>81350604
There is no reason why a law abiding citizen should not be allowed to own AR-15s.
>>81366998
When the point is retarded it tends to be ignored.
>>81366998
What point? Its just b8
>>81350604
>http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2014/06/second-amendment-guns-michael-waldman
>Every adult man, and eventually every adult white man, was required to be in the militias and was required to own a gun, and to bring it from home. So it was an individual right to fulfill the duty to serve in the militias.
>was required to be in the militias and was required to own a gun
>So it was an individual right to fulfill the duty to serve in the militias
Hypothesis: The framers of the bill of rights were so stupid that they couldn't simply write into law that men were required to own weapons and join militias, instead, they had to make it a negative right.
Fantastic hypothesis Weldman, sure doesn't sound like contrived bullshit you made up after being spurred on by a massacre.
>>81350604
>Well regulated
This didn't mean what you think it means
>Right to bear arms
Yes all the arms and all the bears and all the bear arms
>>81350604
Also 1 post this is a slider
>>81360204
Maybe you should start reading, anon.
Normally I would assume that your crackhead mom dropped you too many times, but then again there is not much to damage inside a hollow skull.
https://www.billofrightsinstitute.org/founding-documents/bill-of-rights/
>>81350604
Dat clips doe
i don't own a gun. I do know that fully auto like the Tommy are illegal
1. No one needs a commercial truck this large.
2. The Founding Fathers never envisioned large commercial trucks, and did not intend for people to drive them.
3. These “assault trucks” are designed for killing large numbers of people quickly, and that is their only use.
4. We need a “no truck” list immediately, one that does not require due process to get on or off.
5. No where in the Constitution does it mention the freedom to own these killing devices called trucks.
6. Large commercial trucks should only be owned by the police, military, or politicians, NOT normal citizens, who can use horses.
7. We already have licensing, registration, titles, inspection, and multiple taxes on large commercial vehicles, and STILL they are used for mass killing. Enough is enough. We must ban them entirely.
8. We must follow Australia’s example – we must have a massive government buy-back of all trucks currently owned by American citizens, then, they must be destroyed.
9. We must empower the police and military to go door-to-door to forcibly remove these “assault trucks”. Deadly force is reasonable when “disarming” people of these killing devices.
10. If it will save the life of even a single child, we must rid our society of trucks.
11. And lastly, we must continue to resettle enormous numbers of Muslims throughout the United States, primarily in rural, white, Christian areas.
>>81350604
>>81350604
Assault rifles are superior to shotguns or handguns for self defense, but you already know SD isn't the point of 2A. Fighting the government is.
The fact that you even mentioned >muh militia only goes to show your lack of understanding for the English language.
also
>needs
>>81356714
Jesus you're stupid
>>81370287
Pretty sure he was being sarcastic.
>>81350604
Molon Labe, you filthy cum-encrusted "one post by this ID" shit-fiend.
>>81350604
>pretends the word "infringed" doesn't exist
>shitpost about infringing in an arbitrary and biased way
>says nothing about protecting anyone
>says nothing about how people are supposed to protect themselves from gangsters in suits running the country or thugs with badges as their henchmen
>but lets take away some guns that shoot a little better and only let the thugs use those because we don't want to protect anyone really we want you all to die a long lingering death
>valid
>you don't even know or care what those words mean because you are clearly a massive faggot shilling for some other massive faggot
what a waste of your life
it's very sad to see scummy people do horrible things all over the place every day
>...the right of THE PEOPLE to keep and bear arms...
"The people" are rarely explicitly mentioned in the Constitution or the Bill of Rights. That's because the primary purpose of the Constitution is not to guarantee rights. The primary purpose of the Constitution is to codify the relationship between the states and the federal government. I would personally wager that liberals would view every explicit mention of "the people" as protecting an individual right in each case except for the 2nd amendment. The Founders meant for the people to be well armed for many reasons, namely, though not explicitly, as members of an old-school late 18th century militia.
>>81350604
Fuck off
>>81372574
>though not explicitly
Sorry. I mean to say "exclusively."
>>81350604
>clip
What did he mean by this?
>>81350604
>These weapons are a privilege, not a right
wrong again friendo
>automatic
>1 post by this ID
Wish I could buy full autos legally for less than the price of a new car, but with things like the bump fire stock and tac con trigger it's basically the same. Wish suppressors and short barrels were legal without government permission though
>>81351005
Pathetic AR really, mall ninja build for sure
>>81351437
uh oh the poor widdle bitchtits baby got twiggered by the word 'clip'
go back to your hugbox aspie
>>81351665
He knows that, youre being trolled
>>81350604
>>81350604
>bear automatic AR-15's with 50 round clips
>almost 100 replies
>>81350604
>automatic
>AR-15
Liberals in charge of knowing guns.
>>81350604
>automatic
>>81350604
ok, then the 13th amendment is up for grabs, and the rest of it too
