The guns of today are NOTHING like the guns they had when the Second Amendment was written. Muskets were slow, inaccurate, and not that powerful. A modern assault rifle is power and can fire dozens of rounds in seconds.
There is absolutely no way that the founding fathers would have been alright with average people owning assault rifles. Muskets, yes, but assault rifles? I don't think so. But even if they did, the founding fathers also owned slaves and kept women from voting. Are they really the kind of role models we need to be looking up to in 2022?
It won't be easy to ban and confiscate assault rifles but we need to at least try instead of being the generation that could have done something but was too afraid of the NRA to try.
So why aren't 2a people demanding the right to own cruise missiles, nuclear submarines and drive around the streets in a fully loaded functional M1 Abrams and have an AC130 gunship within easy reach of every man incase shit goes wrong?
If you want it to be on par with the state's weapons like it was back in those days then that's what you need, as it stands the state has all the really powerful stuff to itself.
Mason Wilson
Your average American should be allowed to own a fully armed Ohio-class submarine.
Aren't you the guy who posted this same bait thread yesterday?
Elijah Barnes
Take it from a Europoor who has no way of forming an armed mob to push back against the globalist cabal who stole my country, never give up your ability to defend yourself. Guns are better than nothing. Your founding fathers could've added a caveat "unless the guns get really mental and dangerous". But they didn't so suck a dick
Oliver Sullivan
this thread again eh? Can't even be bothered to spice up your lame pasta? Write a better bot JIDF.
Jason Powell
because that serves no purpose in an insurection. the goal is to compete with the state inside of the country not outside.
Carson Sanders
We should have those too
Noah Martin
>the goal is to compete with the state inside of the country not outside. Having those things absolutely has a purpose. If the state can bring in fighter jets and launch cruise missiles then the public has to be able to do the same or else it's at a disadvantage.
Infact if you want it to really compete, the public needs an entire alternate military of its own to be able to compete, complete with the same weapons and logistical training. The US military could scramble jets at a moment's notice, can YOU?
Why don't 2a people ever say it then?
Samuel Barnes
you are too stupid
Hunter Wright
>The guns of today are NOTHING like the guns they had when the Second Amendment was written. Neither were faggots yet here you are.
Ryder Miller
This, big goof by founding cucks. Welp here we are, either fan shits or incels kills your children god bles
Camden Walker
That's a retarded point, the guns they had back then were the most powerful they could get and they didn't mention the need to use less powerful or obsolete guns m, or swords, or knifes. In fact if they could have used AK-47 I bet they would have.
So why was it ok to use the most lethal weapon of their time but not the most lethal weapon now ?
