Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

5

____deleted____ wrote

I can't help but agree with the sentiment many share on guns; they must be accessible to the public in order to allow the people to defeat their own government.

4

glokaya_kuzdra wrote

Literally made by revolutionaries to protect the right to future revolution. It's so ironic the people arguing for "progress" are on the side of restricting access to guns, since it creates a situation that makes future progress less possible.

2

edmund_the_destroyer wrote (edited )

The words of the 2nd Amendment are "the right … to bear arms shall not be infringed."

It says 'arms', i.e. weapons, and not specifically 'guns'. Do you support personal ownership of grenades? Grenade launchers? Surface-to-air missiles? Ballistic missiles? MOABs ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GBU-43/B_MOAB )? Phosphorus weapons? Nuclear weapons? How about chemical weapons? Biological weapons? All those would be extremely useful to allow regular citizens to defeat an oppressive government.

My brother used to do quarry blasting for work. He would routinely drive around a truck with the trailer full of material with a total of ten times the explosive power of the Oklahoma City bombing. That's a form of 'arms', it would be very handy to prevent a military occupation of an area. Should any citizen be able to buy that kind of explosives without any permit or oversight?

(Edit: To be crystal clear, the US government and all of the citizens already interpret 'arms'. We don't allow unrestricted access to anything that can kill people. So the question has been where to draw the line. It's absurd to argue that no line exists, and everyone should be able to buy anything they want.)

4

selver wrote

How the hell is this guy making a slippery slope argument about a document that's already been amended 27 times.

The Constitution is, however, the greatest single document in human history and provides the road map we must follow to protect liberty.

wew

3

DissidentRage wrote

If you look at most of the mass shootings, they tend to be perpetrated by straight white suburban males with a right wing hero complex. If you look at the execution of past gun control laws in the US, they tend to target low-income POC. From where I'm standing, capitalism is completely incapable of correcting this trend. Any gun control measures passed will almost exclusively target groups other than those who perpetrate mass shootings. It will only serve to further single out demographics who are already oppressed while completely failing to ameliorate the issue that has drawn so many into the argument.

-4

freedom wrote

Painful as it may be to hear it, there's nothing special about the people of this country that sets them apart from the other people of the world. It is the Bill of Rights, and only the Bill of Rights, that keeps us from becoming the world's biggest banana republic. The moment we forget that, the American Dream is over.

3

leftous wrote

I don't disagree with the "nothing special" part, and I agree with your stance here against gun control/state regulation. My question is what is this "American dream" you speak of? To me, that is just as much a myth as Americans thinking they are God's chosen people.

-5

freedom wrote

Fundamentally, there are only two ways of coordinating the economic activities of millions. One is central direction involving the use of coercion - the technique of the army and of the modern totalitarian state. The other is voluntary cooperation of individuals - the technique of the marketplace.

7

ConnieCommie wrote

Fundamentally, there are only two ways of coordinating the economic activities of millions. One is central direction involving the use of coercion - the technique of the army and of the modern totalitarian state. The other is voluntary cooperation of individuals - the technique of the marketplace.

yes the market totally works