The 2nd amendment is a joke, a relic, and a farce; needs to be repealed ASAP

[concise]

So how did this

The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed; a well armed, and well regulated militia being the best security of a free country: but no person religiously scrupulous of bearing arms, shall be compelled to render military service in person.

become this fragment

A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

And considering one of the reasons the right to bear arms was to give the people a bit of empowerment against whatever was perceived to be tyrannical government, it's even funnier now. Imagine some people talking about they're going to revolt against the modern government at any level.

Uncle Sam:

 

[Broke Wave]

No.

 

[R.E.N. Spells Ren]

Um, so why does it need to be repealed? ASAP?

 

[concise]

Um, so why does it need to be repealed? ASAP?

Because it's a farce and an appeal to a false sense of empowerment.

 

[R.E.N. Spells Ren]

Because it's a farce and an appeal to a false sense of empowerment.

Even if your interpretation is correct, you haven't presented an argument for why it needs to be repealed, urgently, no less.

 

[TruStyle]

Giving up rights is what's hot in the streets now?



Weredaydodatat

 

[concise]

Even if your interpretation is correct, you haven't presented an argument for why it needs to be repealed, urgently, no less.

1. Needs to be repealed to maintain uniformity with the way things actually are. You are not defending yourself against the government with your arms.
2. It's obviously the only way to get any true gun control reform. To have gun control reform, there needs to be a scarcity of guns. To have a scarcity of guns, we have to stop pretending that this "right" exists. Gun control only works when guns are rare, like in the UK.
3. How is it that it's already the only right in the Bill of Rights that can be taken away? An convicted felon still has his right to free speech, right to a fair trial, etc. But his right to bear arms is suddenly in jeopardy? Distinctions have already been made.

Giving up rights is what's hot in the streets now?



Weredaydodatat

Yes, it is. Where have you been for the last 10 years?

 

[DreadHead P]

the entire constitution needs to be repealed, its outdated as fukk

 

[Dafunkdoc_Unlimited]

You have no idea what you're talking about and should stop making posts like this.​

 

[R.E.N. Spells Ren]

1. Needs to be repealed to maintain uniformity with the way things actually are. You are not defending yourself against the government with your arms.
2. It's obviously the only way to get any true gun control reform. To have gun control reform, there needs to be a scarcity of guns. To have a scarcity of guns, we have to stop pretending that this "right" exists. Gun control only works when guns are rare, like in the UK.
3. How is it that it's already the only right in the Bill of Rights that can be taken away? An convicted felon still has his right to free speech, right to a fair trial, etc. But his right to bear arms is suddenly in jeopardy? Distinctions have already been made.

The only thing in this quote that resembles an argument for why it needs to be repealed, is number two...It needs to be repealed for our safety. I disagree and am not interested in living in a country without that right (a right that I, personally, exercise) and where only the government is armed

 

[concise]

Why is it OK to take away a felon's right to bear arms but not his right to free speech?

 

[Shogun]

yeah...my wife is afraid of my AR-15.....girls will be girls

 

[Dafunkdoc_Unlimited]

Why is it OK to take away a felon's right to bear arms but not his right to free speech?

Realistically speaking, you can't stop a human from talking.​

 

[yesiambowling]

You'd think dumbasses would realize that it's in place to STOP the country from turning into a police state.

 

[R.E.N. Spells Ren]

Why is it OK to take away a felon's right to bear arms but not his right to free speech?

The answer is obvious, but regardless, it has no bearing on the right to bear arms needing to be repealed. I'm done, breh