How does a gun nut argue against this point?

>So why can't you buy AK 47? Or rpg? Or a mg 42?
who lied to you and said i couldn't?
tax stamps are not that expensive.

Oh boy you figured it out. All the lawyers and constitutional scholars can pack it up and go home. A guy who speaks English as a second language on a Mongolian basket weaving forum has it all wrapped up.

Attached: 1652058262061.gif (351x498, 2.41M)

Disingenuous faggots love to misinterpret this. It means that the right of every man AND militia of ANY SIZE to bear arms SHALL NOT be infringed

I can buy a semi automatic configured AK 47 today if I wanted to. You have a lot to learn Serb bro.

We can break down the sentence structure in english if you like. It's exactly the same.

>a well regulated church, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and practice religion shall not be infringed
Who has the right to religion? The church or the people?

nigger, it says, "since the government needs a military to ensure the security of the state, civilians may also bear arms so that tyrannical military rule will not take root"

full auto is a stamp tax

Regulated meant "trained" at that time. CNN themselves admit it (constitutioncenter.org/images/uploads/news/CNN_Aug_11.pdf):

"Well-regulated in the 18th century tended to be something like well-organized, well-armed, well-disciplined," says Rakove. "It didn't mean 'regulation' in the sense that we use it now, in that it's not about the regulatory state. There's been nuance there. It means the militia was in an effective shape to fight."

'A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.'

States have the right for their people to keep and bear arms - and such a right shall not be infringed - because it constitutes a well-regulated militia FOR those states, which are necessary for such a state's security.

I can literally buy all those things here in the United States. I literally just have to have enough money, that's it.

>A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
allow me to dissect the sentence retard

>a well regulated militia, which is needed to maintain a safe and free country, and the right of individuals to use guns won't be infringed
do you want me to dumb it down further

>a strong militia and normal people have the right to own and use guns, and that right won't be infringed upon

do you understand

Attached: bunker cuck 2.png (1887x3356, 278.61K)

Pretty sure you can buy all those things. Some might be harder than others, but you can.

>sentence fragment
>point
>complete lack of point
???
This post is extremely low-quality

fpbp and /thread

It means being a good shot.

Regulated means working or functional.

A well working militia being necessary to a free state....

I don't have guns and I still want gun freedoms to remain in society. Eradicate guns the slow way, please: by making them seem irrelevant to a peaceful world. There's no need to ban them. Heck, armed pacifism is real, so take it slooow.

based

Attached: 1654139503831.jpg (699x485, 121.8K)

Attached: usconstitution2.png (1314x752, 640.62K)

the third amendment abolishes a standing army if read correctly or it completely abolishes any concept of government spying ;^)

>So why can't you buy AK 47? Or rpg? Or a mg 42? Those are arms right?
You realize the court can make mistakes?

An AK 47 civilian configuration is easy to buy. The ammo is a little on the expensive side though.

see picture. alternatively: "fuck you, no."

Attached: FUC5rleVsAEihSU.jpg (1284x537, 111.81K)

>configured
Can you read, you fucking moron? I'm not talking about modded ak's that limit your fire power, I'm talking about regular AK. You can't own it. It's against the law, you stupid faggot.

Why are lefties so disingenuous. You have an army. An army comprised of farmers. An army comprised of farmers who just fought and won a war against a tyrannical government. A tyrannical government which they defeated with arms. Then they created documents to prevent a tyrannical government from taking hold in the new nation. But somehow, in the event of a tyrannical government, the tyrannical government shall respect all the other 9 amendments in the bill of rights, but for some reason the tyrannical government is allowed to exercise tyranny over the 1 amendment which poses a threat

go away baitin

it says no such thing.
3rd states the you're not responsible for housing a soldier except during declaration of war from congress and only within the confines of the law.

You can if you're a US citizen. You can buy a tank too.

>REEEEEEEEEEEEEEE
Maybe check with the Supreme Court. Of the United States. Faggot.

Attached: 1629329041276.jpg (653x703, 168K)

Actually, it was produced before 1984. It's perfectly legal if you have the money.

"well regulated" now means access to nukes, psyops, economic, and biowarfare

>regular AK. You can't own it. It's against the law,
see
and stop rejecting your told status.

The NFA and similar laws are bullshit and should be repealed, what of it? At least my state is taking steps to legally return our God-given rights to us

The militia is the sum total of the citizenry. The first part of the amendment says that you as a citizen should be the armed militia so that you may defend your home from enemies foreign and domestic. Your ability to do so on par with the military of the government being the only way to ensure the security of a free state.

What's to argue? The retarded thought that it means government regulation?
>The Bill of Rights
>Handing the people's freedom over to be constricted by the government
Wouldn't really be a right then would it? Maybe your interpretation is wrong.
The entire point of the the 2nd amendment is allow the people to overthrow the government when push comes to shove. How would they do that if the government were the ones regulating their militias?

This is another point I think we should bring up more. That the colonists were forced to house redcoats at their own expense. Would a lefty offer room and board to US soldiers free of charge? No? But havent times changed? Isnt war more dangerous and expensive? Why shouldnt lefties quarter soldiers? What reason do they have other than the amendment?

the better question is why does the left think that controlling who has access to firearms is even possible with recent advances in manufacturing tech

Attached: ye old english.jpg (661x754, 61.51K)

well regulated = well trained
olde english, you obtuse faggot

>What reason do they have other than the amendment?
under marital law they would be killed for not complying.
leftists are retards that can't into reality.

It's not just a tyrannical government, but an invading one too. A well armed population is necessary for the security of a free state. If the people were not armed they could be subdued, and hence no longer free. Doesnt matter which force is doing it.

In addition to The federalist papers clear up any "misunderstandings" of the intent of the 2nd amendment. The meaning is not in any sort of question by people who (1) are familiar whatsoever with the writings of the founding members of the US and (2) don't pretend to misunderstand them to push a knowingly unconstitutional agenda.

Can't take a firearm into a courthouse. Why not?

a well regulated militia is so important to a functioning republic that we need unregulated guns to ensure it is possible to form in times of crisis

With common literacy.

which is why i've been telling people for years, "if you were to disarm america china would be on our shores the very next day killing us."
all gun control speak is nothing more than a loaded chinese weapon pointed at your face.

How bout this?
I don’t give a hot fuck what a piece of paper I never signed says. I’ve got a gun right now and you’re not gonna have it. There is nothing you can offer me that will entice me to give it up peacefully. No matter what you say or what pilpul you come up with, I don’t care because I’ve got a gun and I won’t part with it. So stop fuckin asking or acting like this is a negotiation. It’s not. So shut the fuck up or try and take it but there’s no discussion here.
Simple as

By knowing what the historical definition of the phrase "well regulated" means, unlike 99.99r% of libtards.

you 100% can.
just gotta let the cops know you have it or they're gonna shoot you for posing a threat to law and order.

>Well regulated commonly meant “in good working order”
It still does. Regulated or regulator means a mechanism or the work it does to keep something working at a good level; not too much, not too little. Without something being regulated, it often fails.
At the time of the writing, the "well regulated" phrase in the 2A really is included to ensure the people's militia didn't weaken or fall apart.
Even government regulatory agencies were tasked to ensure good working order; e.g., the purpose of the FCC is to make sure communication is ensured. It's only in recent authoritarian times that "regulated" is connotated with control or prohibition.
Imagine if the USA Commerce Department had "prevent as much commerce as possible" as their mission statement - that's what these idiots jumping on the "well regulated" phrase are implying.

Attached: fight-club-tyler-durden-thats-right.gif (498x278, 1.3M)

The militia is well regulated right now

The still mean those thing unless you are a kike lawyer

>militias, required to be free state
>therefore
>everyone has the right to own and use arms
it was written so that even illiterate farmers could understand, of course it takes a kike marxist revolution to manipulate

Chud moment

LMAO what was the expression for 'mental gymnastics' from 1690 up to 1920?

With the next word.

"Shut the fuck up faggot."

well regulated means healthy, fuctional and strong.
it's just oldstyle speak

"Since a well equipped and armed populace is required for maintaining a free and independent nation, everyone is free to own firearms and other weapons, and no one can ever fuck with that right."

That's how it might be written in modern American pidgin English for all you retards out there who can't understand words or grammar, never mind slightly antiquated (yet still very clear and understandable) words or grammar.

this.
there is no argument here.
you are not going to take them.
end of story.

by knowing that contextually, "well regulated" means that militia forces should be skilled with arms of contemporary military utility and relevant military tactics, so that they can serve in the defense of Republic against both foreign invaders and the threat of domestic tyrants commanding a national army against the liberty of the citizenry.

Yo it’s essential to a free country to be able to call up a militia at a moments notice so it’s best we don’t infringe the peoples right to keep and bear arms. Would suck to call up a militia and get a bunch of fags that never held a rifle. Better leave the right to keep and bear arms the fuck alone.

You can, and more importantly you used to be able to until the NFA was passed and the Supreme Court wouldn't rule on it.

Literally not a single argument posted except " I LIEK MUH GUNZ". Obviously, guns are regulated in the US. They just aren't well regulated, and this needs to change. And it will change.

Gallows

>not being allowed to own nuclear weapons.

That's pretty much ieverywhere. Our ancestors had entire privately owned navies. Your move fag.

>Well regulated commonly meant “in good working order” in the english language from 1690 up to 1920. It didn’t mean regulated by law as in compliance regulations.
This user is well educated.

Enjoy your 300+ reply thread

They ignore it and pay attention to the "shall not be infringed" portion.

I am well regulated. Every morning after breakfast. Not that it's any of your business

please lurk for 2 years before posting

>Found a country on individual liberty and distrust a government
>Not so fast! We're going to place artificial restrictions on the right to self-defense
seems legit.

Attached: 1610744053551.jpg (716x692, 222.9K)

Because a traitor to the United States of America made it so. Instead people who live in the stone age for the sake of their religious beliefs get equipped with ak47s

Already been for years

check

"well regulated" means equipped and trained, with the militia being the entire male citizen body ages 16 - 60... so fully automatic weapons, explosives, armored vehicles, drones, etc are legal

He understands the meaning of English words.

This as well. Me and my group of buddies get together and suddenly we're a militia. Militias are normal people, OP.

Regulated meant maintained, which remains one definition of the word regulated. Retards always get this wrong.

>So why can't you buy AK 47? Or rpg? Or a mg 42? Those are arms right?
Now youre getting to a core truth, user.
You better ask no further ....

SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED
SHALL NOT

YOU CANNOT HAVE A WELL REGULATED MILITIA IF THE RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE TO BEAR ARMS IS INFRINGED.

SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED.

ALSO FUCK ALL SERBS. YOU ARE LIKE A FUCKING SHITTIER VERSION OF ROMANIA.

>Well regulated commonly meant “in good working order” in the english language from 1690 up to 1920.

No.

Checked and this. Theres a lot of words in that sentence, they all jump on "regulated," as said. Only in recent times has regulation been considered prohibitive.

When someone like me becomes president, we're going to reverse those decisions.

Don’t be retardo Eduardo

The ability to form militias on the fly, with weapons and tactics on par with the military forces of other countries, is necessary for our national defense against enemies foreign and domestic. Therefore, the right of individual free people living within the United States to own, carry and train with weapons of war shall not be hindered in any way by the government.

Based. If you come for our guns, you're not going to have a gun control problem. You're going to have a lead problem.

By knowing that "regulated" doesn't mean "restricted", and that by saying "a well regulated militia, being necessary for a free state" it's actually saying that not only can the federal government not stop you from owning a gun, they can't stop you from forming a militia and training with said militia.
Not that the federal government cares about what they're not allowed to do though.

In order to form a well regulated militia, the right to bear arms shall not be infringed.

Public has a right to bear arms, so in case the government must be overthrown, well regulated militias can be formed.

Now fuck off.

These people operate on redefinitions.