Upload
Login or register
Anonymous comments allowed.
asd
#93 - anon
Reply 0
(01/17/2013) [-]
WOOHOOO EVERYONE SHOULD HAVE GUNS 2ND AMENDMENT RIGHT AMIRITE?? Disregard teh fact that the founding fathers had no experience with weapons that could fire more than one shot without reloading, or guns that could fire accurately from more than 50ft away the second amendment totally protects your right to a weapon capable of killing a room full of people without reloading. Stay classy fj
#146 to #93 - lordaurion
Reply 0
(01/17/2013) [-]
1. Most of the founding fathers were tinkerers and at that time repeating arms was one if the biggest goals of inventors. Google the "puckle gun".
2. Muskets are accurate to much more than 50ft, the rifles they had even more so.
3. Yes it does because the whole point of the amendment is to help protect the others.
#129 to #93 - chiefrunnyjeans
Reply 0
(01/17/2013) [-]
>implying the founding fathers wrote the second amendment for just personal protection
Are you stupid? The guns that they had back then were the technological equivalent to our semi automatic rifles. If they had m16's back then they would have made sure to include them in the second amendment. It is the right to keep and bear arms and shall not be infringed. We have these weapons to keep a check on the government. It's just part of democracy. If you don't like it then move to somewhere where your views will be accepted, like china.
#95 to #93 - violenthandjob
Reply +2
(01/17/2013) [-]
#100 to #95 - anon
Reply 0
(01/17/2013) [-]
nah those are just fact the founding fathers had never seen an m16 or a glock even
#111 to #100 - anon
Reply 0
(01/17/2013) [-]
another fact. the reason we have the right to bear arms is to protect us from our own government.
#225 to #111 - gisuar
Reply 0
(01/17/2013) [-]
try to defend yourself with a gun if the government uses tanks and **** against their own people.
#104 to #100 - violenthandjob
Reply 0
(01/17/2013) [-]
Actually the fact is that is a personal interpretation of what the Second Amendment entails, and SCOTUS is not on the side of it.
#152 to #104 - lordaurion
0
has deleted their comment [-]
#187 to #152 - violenthandjob
Reply 0
(01/17/2013) [-]
Mcdonald v.s. Chicago
#211 to #187 - lordaurion
Reply 0
(01/17/2013) [-]
Wait, wait. I think I misunderstood who you were replying to.
Is this "just fact the founding fathers had never seen an m16 or a glock even" Comment by the anon above what you were replying to when you said " and SCOTUS is not on the side of it."?
#219 to #211 - violenthandjob
Reply 0
(01/17/2013) [-]
Yes
#221 to #219 - lordaurion
Reply 0
(01/17/2013) [-]
Sorry, for whatever reason I registered the reply lines as you talking to this anon "another fact. the reason we have the right to bear arms is to protect us from our own government. "
#246 to #221 - violenthandjob
Reply 0
(01/17/2013) [-]
It's fine bro, when the second anon started replying it confused me too.
#205 to #187 - lordaurion
0
has deleted their comment [-]