2025: "Supreme Court rules Second Amendment actually never meant exactly what it meant for the last 250 years"
Just remember, almost nothing matters as much as 2A does. If we didn't have guns, we'd already be in camps. They are definitely going to keep pushing this narrative that "a militia" is the Natty Gaurd and that commas don't matter or whatever.
When they described militias back then in old documents, anyone from 14-65 was ‘the militia’. It was just ‘people able to bear arms’. Even Annie Oakley was for it and women being trained as snipers. Most people of that time were encouraged to be armed to the teeth in case they needed to ride. Every living person in America was ‘the military’ if they weren’t pregnant or raising kids or something. They had what were basically revolvers back then, fucking grenade launchers, cannons, gun ships. You could own a gun ship but not a gun that fires a bullet any time you pull the trigger? I think not.
Here in CA, banning all kinds of guns and extended magazines hasn’t at all stopped criminals from using them. You see them all the time. Week or so ago even an automatic weapon on the freeway. All it’s done is kept them out of the hands of law abiding citizens that could legitimately use them to defend themselves from assholes that aren’t going to obey the law. For all the ‘gun nuts’ that have lots of guns, you don’t see them going out and committing seemingly any crimes with them. Colion Noir would be public enemy number one if that were true.
2025: "Supreme Court rules Second Amendment actually never meant exactly what it meant for the last 250 years"
Just remember, almost nothing matters as much as 2A does. If we didn't have guns, we'd already be in camps. They are definitely going to keep pushing this narrative that "a militia" is the Natty Gaurd and that commas don't matter or whatever.
IT SAYS SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED MOTHERFUCKERS.
-sent from my iPhone which they totally saw coming
I’m sure they also foresaw multinational corporations becoming the dominant purveyor of “news” to citizens.
No they had Kentucky long rifled, which was more advanced than the Brown Bess musket the redcoats had.
The 2nd amendment intended the people to have near-peer or in some areas more advanced weapons than the government.
Ban the Internet, the First Amendment only applies to the printing press
Private citizens were allowed to own 18th century naval cannons. Those are still weapons of mass destruction even today.
When they described militias back then in old documents, anyone from 14-65 was ‘the militia’. It was just ‘people able to bear arms’. Even Annie Oakley was for it and women being trained as snipers. Most people of that time were encouraged to be armed to the teeth in case they needed to ride. Every living person in America was ‘the military’ if they weren’t pregnant or raising kids or something. They had what were basically revolvers back then, fucking grenade launchers, cannons, gun ships. You could own a gun ship but not a gun that fires a bullet any time you pull the trigger? I think not.
Here in CA, banning all kinds of guns and extended magazines hasn’t at all stopped criminals from using them. You see them all the time. Week or so ago even an automatic weapon on the freeway. All it’s done is kept them out of the hands of law abiding citizens that could legitimately use them to defend themselves from assholes that aren’t going to obey the law. For all the ‘gun nuts’ that have lots of guns, you don’t see them going out and committing seemingly any crimes with them. Colion Noir would be public enemy number one if that were true.
-looks around-
Looks to me like it's pretty well infringed everyfuckingwhere I look.
“The court has made it’s decision. Now let them enforce it.”
They’ll have targets
2025: Militias rule current Supreme Court members are debarred per the Constitution and previous rulings unlawful.
The NFA is unconstitutional on its face. Hasn’t stopped them from ignoring it.