This.
Doesn't the currently military infrastructure make the 2nd amendment obsolete?
- Thread starter Ethnic Vagina Finder
- Start date
Kyle C. Barker
Migos VERZUZ Mahalia Jackson
I'd imagine a bunch of drone strikes with infared imaging dropping targets with ease
The irony in people defending the second amendment on the premise of citizens defending what's theres.....
It's too late. Already lost. We live in a police state fueled by capitalism and fear. The government has been bought by corporations and billionaires. The 1%.
States have their own gun laws anyway. Like I said, the 2nd amendment is useless. All it does is perpetuate a for profit BUSINESS. Nothing more, nothing less. We manufacture so many guns, this country gives them away.
It's too late. Already lost. We live in a police state fueled by capitalism and fear. The government has been bought by corporations and billionaires. The 1%.
States have their own gun laws anyway. Like I said, the 2nd amendment is useless. All it does is perpetuate a for profit BUSINESS. Nothing more, nothing less. We manufacture so many guns, this country gives them away.
Are you arguing for against here?
I cant tell.
Woah there breh you don’t wanna get involved with #trumpset @DEAD7
To be honest alot of you guys make good points on both sides no trumpo though
Are you arguing for against here?
I'm saying the 2nd amendment doesn't mean nothing in the 21st century. It's not needed. It's served it's purpose long ago and it's only used as an excuse for manufactures to keep making money selling them and people simply being obsessed with having them.
And bearing arms isn't limited to guns. It's weapons in general. Guns were developed to kill as many living things as possible with accuracy and efficiently. Gun rights are nothing more than political props. You never hear about sword rights, bow and arrow rights, axe rights, or pepper spray rights. Just find.
I'm against the 2nd amendment because like I said, it doesn't fit into today's society.
AlainLocke
Banned
You don't make any sense....
You are against the second amendment because you are defeated...
That's what you are saying...
The right to bear arms is a right to violently resist the government...which was written into the constitution because...the USA was born out of a revolution and the Framers actually believed if the government doesn't serve the people...you should overthrow it...
Black people are the last people on this planet that should want to abolish gun rights...
And your argument makes no sense outside of..."Well...the USA has a good army so why even try..."
Which is pathetic btw...
Fair enough but much of the country feels differently.
Democracy! 
Word. As if your tetchy AR-15s going to stand up to the task when the tanks roll in 
might as well bring a knife to a gun fight
I remember having this exact discussion in HL last year. Some fool brought up Afghanistan's resistance to the Soviet invasion as an example of citizen militias standing up to a superpower army. Yeah, except they got money, training and weapons all for free from the CIA. Those shoulder mounted portable RPGs the Mujahideen used to shoot down Soviet choppers are not going to be available in your local gunstore
might as well bring a knife to a gun fightI remember having this exact discussion in HL last year. Some fool brought up Afghanistan's resistance to the Soviet invasion as an example of citizen militias standing up to a superpower army. Yeah, except they got money, training and weapons all for free from the CIA. Those shoulder mounted portable RPGs the Mujahideen used to shoot down Soviet choppers are not going to be available in your local gunstore
African Peasant
Veteran
Those white with guns can wage a guerrilla warfare.
There is no assurance that it will stop a tyranny but it will make things hard for it.
And on a personal level, if you're 25 yo, you should at least know how to use a fire arm.
There is no assurance that it will stop a tyranny but it will make things hard for it.
And on a personal level, if you're 25 yo, you should at least know how to use a fire arm.
Ya' Cousin Cleon
OG COUCH CORNER HUSTLA
Word. As if your tetchy AR-15s going to stand up to the task when the tanks roll in
I remember having this exact discussion in HL last year. Some fool brought up Afghanistan's resistance to the Soviet invasion as an example of citizen militias standing up to a superpower army. Yeah, except they got money, training and weapons all for free from the CIA. Those shoulder mounted portable RPGs the Mujahideen used to shoot down Soviet choppers are not going to be available in your local gunstore
Homefield advantage as well
Contrefaire
Superstar
In no way do I think the second amendment should be abolished but OP has a point about it being virtually symbolic at this point.
However to those saying well you don't know where the loyalties of servicemen really lie, you wouldn't even need the full force of the military to pacify or overwhelm the American people at this point. If the US gov DID decide to take such an action they're highly unlikely to do it by engaging in ground warfare as a primary strategy. But fukk the weapons, the government could already wipe out all but the most rudimentary forms of communication RIGHT NOW if they so choose. That right there would be a huge problem for a large portion of the armed population.
What about the citizenry having a couple handguns and some AR-15s would be "too annoying" to take tyrannical action? They're not nearly "armed enough".
We don't have drones, we don't have bombs and we don't have tanks. We also don't have helicopters or airplanes. And framed properly, you'd have a large percentage of the population championing taking military action under the "right" set of circumstances. Just look how these whites clapped and cheered when the tanks rolled into Ferguson. These idiots jack off to the flag and the military harder than ever before.
However to those saying well you don't know where the loyalties of servicemen really lie, you wouldn't even need the full force of the military to pacify or overwhelm the American people at this point. If the US gov DID decide to take such an action they're highly unlikely to do it by engaging in ground warfare as a primary strategy. But fukk the weapons, the government could already wipe out all but the most rudimentary forms of communication RIGHT NOW if they so choose. That right there would be a huge problem for a large portion of the armed population.
What about the citizenry having a couple handguns and some AR-15s would be "too annoying" to take tyrannical action? They're not nearly "armed enough".
We don't have drones, we don't have bombs and we don't have tanks. We also don't have helicopters or airplanes. And framed properly, you'd have a large percentage of the population championing taking military action under the "right" set of circumstances. Just look how these whites clapped and cheered when the tanks rolled into Ferguson. These idiots jack off to the flag and the military harder than ever before.
BaltimoreTwilightMarauder
Superstar
We didn’t win Vietnam, or Afghanistan. All they had are machine guns and some scavenged shyt.
Modern Guerrilla warfare neutralizes much of an advanced militaries advantages.
Modern Guerrilla warfare neutralizes much of an advanced militaries advantages.
Eternally Jaded
Superstar
I do scoff at the ability of your average gun owner to deter military action but homefield disadvantage is something to be considered.
A war at home, is something our government would HATE to have to fight, as the damage would have to be fixed via their own pockets.
A war at home, is something our government would HATE to have to fight, as the damage would have to be fixed via their own pockets.
i could fukk your wife give upthat shyt was written when armies rode horses with shytty penny riffles.. If the USA wanted to become a tyranny, hicks with guns wont stop anything, look at yall Police Departments most of those dudes are fit for combat
