The Marxists/globalists have already missed their window of opportunity: weapon bans will no longer be effective toward their goal of a helpless populace.
Pop quiz for “GFY Joe” and handlers: what is a platoon (or squad, etc.) leader’s weapon? It’s an easy one. Call down to Quantico and ask the newest TBS grad 2ndLt.
The events of the past year has proven the left doesn't need to pass weapon bans. America has the most extensively armed bunch of SHEEP on the planet. The left has destroyed our economy, imprisoned people in their homes, forced virtually everyone to wear face diapers, is actively poisoning us with unproven genetically dangerous vaccines and in the midst of all this committed the crime of the century stealing the White House and numerous other offices. And done all this without a single commie bastard being hot for this panoply of crimes against freedom and America. More than adequate proof that having more privately owned weapons then the rest of the world combined means nothing. A society with any balls would have been stacking politician corpses long before today.
One major problem is back in 1791 when the 2A was ratified the military and the civilians had the same weapons, cannons would be the exception, pretty much a fair fight. Today unless us patriots have the military on our side trying to take over the government would be really rough.
Best bet is to take the motherfuckers out one by one with whatever method is convenient.
I sort of figure that the 2nd amendment protects our right to keep and bear any arms that an individual member of the military might possess. So we should be able to own and carry an M-4, select fire carbine, just like a soldier has. A crew served weapon, I don't think it is an individual right, such as a mortar or a machine gun that takes 2 or more people to operate. I an not certain on that stance, I might be mistaken, but I know that I am right about civilians being able to have at least what an individual soldier has. As for cannons, some wealthy patriots owned both cannons and even ships that were used as a part of the Navy to defeat the British in the Revolutionary war. Recognizing that the constitution is a limit on the government and not the individual, perhaps we could justify a civilian owning and using ANY type of weapon that they can afford to own, providing that they don't use it in a manner that infringes on someone else's rights. Like you can own a machine gun, but you can't have it so that you can shoot any car that drives down to the end of your subdivision. Or you can own an M-4, but you can't us it to rob a 7-11.
Militia (including all citizens) should be armed to defend against a foreign invader or from a tyrannical government. In pre- and post-Revolution days, some towns had cannon for the militia. Anybody who could afford an anti-tank weapon these days is not likely to be a criminal or a terrorist. I would like to have a couple of the latest model RPG and a couple dozen rounds, but SS and Army retired pay is not enough.
At the beginning of the Republic, citizens owned and used cannon and privateers. Citizens had exactly the same (or better) weapons that the military had. (Military had muskets, citizens had rifles.) As far as I'm concerned, citizens should have full auto weapons, cannon, fighter aircraft, attack helicopters, armor, or nukes, if they want them.
The events of the past year has proven the left doesn't need to pass weapon bans. America has the most extensively armed bunch of SHEEP on the planet. The left has destroyed our economy, imprisoned people in their homes, forced virtually everyone to wear face diapers, is actively poisoning us with unproven genetically dangerous vaccines and in the midst of all this committed the crime of the century stealing the White House and numerous other offices. And done all this without a single commie bastard being hot for this panoply of crimes against freedom and America. More than adequate proof that having more privately owned weapons then the rest of the world combined means nothing. A society with any balls would have been stacking politician corpses long before today.
ReplyDeleteGreat comment and agree with you 100%
DeleteOne major problem is back in 1791 when the 2A was ratified the military and the civilians had the same weapons, cannons would be the exception, pretty much a fair fight. Today unless us patriots have the military on our side trying to take over the government would be really rough.
Best bet is to take the motherfuckers out one by one with whatever method is convenient.
I sort of figure that the 2nd amendment protects our right to keep and bear any arms that an individual member of the military might possess. So we should be able to own and carry an M-4, select fire carbine, just like a soldier has. A crew served weapon, I don't think it is an individual right, such as a mortar or a machine gun that takes 2 or more people to operate.
DeleteI an not certain on that stance, I might be mistaken, but I know that I am right about civilians being able to have at least what an individual soldier has.
As for cannons, some wealthy patriots owned both cannons and even ships that were used as a part of the Navy to defeat the British in the Revolutionary war. Recognizing that the constitution is a limit on the government and not the individual, perhaps we could justify a civilian owning and using ANY type of weapon that they can afford to own, providing that they don't use it in a manner that infringes on someone else's rights. Like you can own a machine gun, but you can't have it so that you can shoot any car that drives down to the end of your subdivision. Or you can own an M-4, but you can't us it to rob a 7-11.
READ Untended Consequence it will settle your doubt about what the 2nd means.
Deleteand Henry Bowman would be proud of you
DeleteMilitia (including all citizens) should be armed to defend against a foreign invader or from a tyrannical government. In pre- and post-Revolution days, some towns had cannon for the militia. Anybody who could afford an anti-tank weapon these days is not likely to be a criminal or a terrorist. I would like to have a couple of the latest model RPG and a couple dozen rounds, but SS and Army retired pay is not enough.
ReplyDeleteAt the beginning of the Republic, citizens owned and used cannon and privateers. Citizens had exactly the same (or better) weapons that the military had. (Military had muskets, citizens had rifles.) As far as I'm concerned, citizens should have full auto weapons, cannon, fighter aircraft, attack helicopters, armor, or nukes, if they want them.
ReplyDelete