5616
Comments (822)
sorted by:
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
318
RockyMin 318 points ago +318 / -0

Yeah, pretty convenient. However, I read in some of the articles that states have banned militias or something like that. How can they ban something that the constitution says we have a right to do?

275
SickIcarus 275 points ago +275 / -0

They can’t. But that’s never stopped them before.

192
Side-o-Beef_Curtains 192 points ago +194 / -2

laughs in California gun law

106
ClownTamer 106 points ago +106 / -0

Seriously. Buying guns here was the most convoluted thing I’ve ever done in my entire life. Then after all that, when you’re taking them home, you keep them locked up in the trunk... but the ammo can’t be in the same box as the gun. Look, if I’m going to go around raising hell, do you think having to take 1 second to load a magazine is going to save any lives?

Or with the 10+ magazine bans. It takes an average person 7 shots to bring down an attacker. Now add on more attackers, who in my area are verifiably likely to have high capacity magazines. It’s like they’re outlawing self defense.

63
deleted 63 points ago +63 / -0
50
Side-o-Beef_Curtains 50 points ago +50 / -0

I'm selling everything I own and moving right now. FFFFUUUUCCCCKKKK BLUE STATES!!!

38
GingerMan512 38 points ago +38 / -0

My record for a gun purchase is 18 minutes in and out the door. I love Texas.

Spez: This was a commercial gun purchase.

20
KekistanPM 20 points ago +20 / -0

It must have been so hard to live back in the old west where all these regulations weren't in place.

Surely every day tens of thousands of people, from veteran law enforcement to simple farmers, had to deal with accidental firings, misfires, guns just discharging by themselves and even loading themselves because they didn't take proper precautions that those regulations could have saved them from.

11
Paul_Revere 11 points ago +11 / -0

It’s like they’re outlawing self defense.

You got it.

100
Dgilles111 100 points ago +102 / -2

What we need is a federal mandate to create citizens militias in every single county. That militia will not be subject to NFA/ATF regulations.

60
RockyMin 60 points ago +60 / -0

Agreed. That's probably what our forefathers had in mind.

13
RandomUzer 13 points ago +13 / -0

To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;

To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress

source https://constitution.congress.gov/constitution/

8
Scroon 8 points ago +8 / -0

Actually, the "militia" they were referring to is the fighting force composed of all the armed, able-bodied men in the country. The Militia is formed when these armed civilians are called into service.

This is why the 2A actually implies that every one of us should be armed with military-grade firearms. Together, we are the Continental Army.

41
Fabius 41 points ago +41 / -0

I think we should keep government out of it. All of you are so quick to run to the government to make a regulation, to "mandate" all the time. That's what got us into this mess.

29
brother_red 29 points ago +30 / -1

Boom.

Here is some .win gold. 💰🐸

5
FragrantDude 5 points ago +5 / -0

Unfortunately when you do it on your own, the government tends to go Waco on you.

19
zabbers 19 points ago +20 / -1

You could even sell it to the liberals as a way to monitor "the gun nuts".

As long as we don't actually share lists of gun owners with the government which is what they want in case they need to round them up.

16
Kweebecker 16 points ago +16 / -0

The government would want to know, and would find out legally or illegally, the population and membership of these militias.That's just a fact. The option is how to work around this so that privacy rights aren't violated.

7
wholesomekangz100 7 points ago +7 / -0

Lmao at thinking that liberals don’t just want the right dead and suffering

2
NomadicKrow 2 points ago +2 / -0

Or just do it. NFAC is a militia. A racist one, but a militia nonetheless.

3
bundyfly 3 points ago +3 / -0

CIA Glowfags

16
WowStrongWinning 16 points ago +16 / -0

That’s a great idea!

8
Kekintosh2020 8 points ago +8 / -0

I'm so hard rn

3
MudDog 3 points ago +3 / -0

It'll take more than that for me after seeing a picture of Pelosi

31
Spawnlingman 31 points ago +31 / -0

Them: they call themselves militias. But we call them nazi terrorists. So their illegal.

31
deleted 31 points ago +31 / -0
18
grenades_and_ham 18 points ago +18 / -0

Or Crypt Keeper.

8
deleted 8 points ago +8 / -0
7
grndmrshlgando 7 points ago +7 / -0

they call themselves democrats but we call them communist tyrants so they're illegal

16
Modus_Pwninz 16 points ago +16 / -0

how can they ban something that the constitution says we have a right to do

Gun laws called, they are just laughing into the phone for some reason...?

16
zhalias 16 points ago +16 / -0

Probably some super vaguely worded law that doesn't actually do anything and doesn't get enforced, because it would be unconstitutional. That has been their new tactic lately.

Pass a vague law, that the average person will think makes X illegal which makes them stop doing it, and then just don't actually enforce the law or arrest anybody for it. The majority of people stopped doing X thing because they THINK it is illegal, and unless someone sues and the Supreme Court strikes it down the law will remain on the books.

That's why they don't actively enforce it, and the few people still doing X thing are never arrested, which means they never sue for having their rights violated.

5
zabbers 5 points ago +5 / -0

Then they whip it out at just the right moment to create a media story.

"BUT MAH EMOLUMENTS!"

2
Truthdose 2 points ago +2 / -0

More leftist patriots acts huh...

...