Nuclear and other WMDs also shouldn't be allowed. Frankly, I always wonder hardliners justify in their heads that average Joe should be able to own a nuclear weapon.
It's not because I don't believe in the second amendment -- I am increasingly pro-second by the day, in fact, and all the restrictions are stupid and I think people should stop giving those miles -- but because, unlike the argument being used for fully automatic rifles or heavy machine guns, nuclear weaponry is actually beyond any possible thought.
The founding fathers would not have condoned random people owning a weapon that can wipe potentially hundreds of thousands of lives out instantly.
It's a weapon beyond any scale seen before, utterly terrifying and totally destructive, with long reaching effects -- such as radiation making regions uninhabitable for years, or getting into water sources, or frying a large portion of the country's electrical grid if detonated high enough.
So I'll say it and accept the downvotes: Random people should be able to own any gun they want unless they violate someone's liberty (e.g. going out and killing someone) but should not be able to own a WMD.
No downvotes from me, I fully agree. That's just common sense. You can have restrictions on weapons to a degree and it doesn't make you any less pro-2A. it just doesn't make sense for a civilian to own a nuclear weapon.
I have expressed the sentiment on the old subreddit, and gotten a ton of downvotes. There are people who sincerely believe that if you can afford it, you should be able to own it.
They don't really think about the tangible effects of that. Soros could afford quite a pretty number of nuclear weapons in his back yard and probably afford to have a delivery method too.
Arguing about the size of the arms is NOT the intent of the Second Amendment. That is the argument of the Left. It is the argument of enslavement to argue that the 2A excludes weapons beyond a certain range.
The intent of the Second Amendment is to allow the average citizen with the means to arm up as comparably as any cartel or government could bring to bear upon the individual, to curtail crime, tyranny, and foreign invasion.
At the very minimum, the 2A guarantees the average citizen ought to be equipped as well as the average soldier of the nation of the time. Think of what weapon systems the average infantrymen have at their fingertips today - that's supposed to be citizen MILITIA level equipping.
Now, go back and read some history.
Most of the ship warfare in the Revolutionary War and the War of 1812 was done through...private warships.
Most of the artillery used up to the Civil War was...privately owned. Many towns combined their private funds and had cannon forged for them...for private militia usage. Many wealthy had their own supply of cannon.
So, yes, the 2A declares the citizen with the means ought to be able to procure those weapon systems any modern government can bring to bear upon that citizen.
Since our dear Democrat Presidential Candidate Swalwell declared he'd nuke gun owning societies...then it bears the intent of the 2A is to have the citizen be able to bring equal firepower against the would-be tyrants.
Swalwell would not have spouted those stupid words off so quickly, were nuclear arms owned by certain scattered wealthy across the States.
If our government can bring the weapon to bear upon us...then the 2A says we should be able to balance that terror with an equal one of the citizen's own.
The 2A covers everything from the slightest airgun to the ICBM, and beyond to the most powerful futuristic weapons systems only envisioned in Sci-Fi games and shows today.
That being said, If you have enough space to own an RPG without engandering innocent people, go for it.
Nuclear and other WMDs also shouldn't be allowed. Frankly, I always wonder hardliners justify in their heads that average Joe should be able to own a nuclear weapon.
It's not because I don't believe in the second amendment -- I am increasingly pro-second by the day, in fact, and all the restrictions are stupid and I think people should stop giving those miles -- but because, unlike the argument being used for fully automatic rifles or heavy machine guns, nuclear weaponry is actually beyond any possible thought.
The founding fathers would not have condoned random people owning a weapon that can wipe potentially hundreds of thousands of lives out instantly.
It's a weapon beyond any scale seen before, utterly terrifying and totally destructive, with long reaching effects -- such as radiation making regions uninhabitable for years, or getting into water sources, or frying a large portion of the country's electrical grid if detonated high enough.
So I'll say it and accept the downvotes: Random people should be able to own any gun they want unless they violate someone's liberty (e.g. going out and killing someone) but should not be able to own a WMD.
No downvotes from me, I fully agree. That's just common sense. You can have restrictions on weapons to a degree and it doesn't make you any less pro-2A. it just doesn't make sense for a civilian to own a nuclear weapon.
I have expressed the sentiment on the old subreddit, and gotten a ton of downvotes. There are people who sincerely believe that if you can afford it, you should be able to own it.
They don't really think about the tangible effects of that. Soros could afford quite a pretty number of nuclear weapons in his back yard and probably afford to have a delivery method too.
See below; just as I said.
Arguing about the size of the arms is NOT the intent of the Second Amendment. That is the argument of the Left. It is the argument of enslavement to argue that the 2A excludes weapons beyond a certain range.
The intent of the Second Amendment is to allow the average citizen with the means to arm up as comparably as any cartel or government could bring to bear upon the individual, to curtail crime, tyranny, and foreign invasion.
At the very minimum, the 2A guarantees the average citizen ought to be equipped as well as the average soldier of the nation of the time. Think of what weapon systems the average infantrymen have at their fingertips today - that's supposed to be citizen MILITIA level equipping.
Now, go back and read some history.
Most of the ship warfare in the Revolutionary War and the War of 1812 was done through...private warships.
Most of the artillery used up to the Civil War was...privately owned. Many towns combined their private funds and had cannon forged for them...for private militia usage. Many wealthy had their own supply of cannon.
So, yes, the 2A declares the citizen with the means ought to be able to procure those weapon systems any modern government can bring to bear upon that citizen.
Since our dear Democrat Presidential Candidate Swalwell declared he'd nuke gun owning societies...then it bears the intent of the 2A is to have the citizen be able to bring equal firepower against the would-be tyrants.
Swalwell would not have spouted those stupid words off so quickly, were nuclear arms owned by certain scattered wealthy across the States.
If our government can bring the weapon to bear upon us...then the 2A says we should be able to balance that terror with an equal one of the citizen's own.
The 2A covers everything from the slightest airgun to the ICBM, and beyond to the most powerful futuristic weapons systems only envisioned in Sci-Fi games and shows today.
See, you are the stupid person that I was talking about above and now I get to point you out.
Comparing warships to a nuclear weapon is stupid.
I know my history; you are just a retard who wants to measure the size of his dick with the number of people that can be killed with one button push.
No, nuclear weapons should never be owned by private citizens and their creation was a mistake.
Stop preaching to me, bitch. Own any gun you want. Fuck, own anti-air and RPGs, I don't care.
But you can suck a fat dick if you want to own a nuclear or chemical weapon.
Hmmmm.....a newbie here, whose first words in reply are Ad Hominems.
No intelligent rebuttal - just claim the argument is "stupid", and go back to your Ad Hominems.
Go back and sit at the childrens' table, until you get some cogent thoughts and courtesy habits.
Do you believe the Soros types are sane enough to own it?
Maybe. But someone as malicious and influential as the deep state elite should not be able to get their hands on stuff like this.
This is the sort of thing that would allow them to openly defy entire countries just based on the size of their wallets.