JavaScript is disabled
Our website requires JavaScript to function properly. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser settings before proceeding.
The 2A doesn't say we can own "weapons of war"….
except that pesky "militia thing" being necessary for a free state and the people comprise the armed militia (which is NOT a professional standing army)…. so yes, the 2A DOES apply to "weapons of war", not "guns for sporting use or hunting".


And yes you CAN legally own cannons and machine guns, they're just STUPID expensive for the average "Joe".
 
The more I read about the loon in the white house the more I distrust him.
I do not believe that there is a single shooting sports person alive that would have a problem with legislation on fire arms that was directed at the problems not at law abiding shooting sports owners. The people in power seem to think if all the black rifles are removed from the planet all of the other problems will go away. They are all quite mad but they do not know that.
 
The Second Amendment does not guarantee any Right to own a firearm. What it does is to entirely prohibit the government from infringing upon Americans' Rights to own and to use firearms for all purpose moral and just. I wrote "entirely." The Bill of Rights uses the phrase, "shall not be infringed."

Boe JiteMe says the Second Amendment is not absolute. Remember that he graduated in the bottom 11% of his law class. I've written this before in this space, but I shall ask it again: "Is it "not absolute" that a grown man shall not sexually-molest a three year-old girl?" I say it is absolute. Boe JiteMe would seem to say it's not. If he says it is, then his opinion of the Second Amendment is based on his politics rather than the law.
 
The 2A doesn't say we can own "weapons of war."
If the Criminal Left Party says we cannot own "weapons of war," then how in helsinki is it legal for Americans to buy Jeep automobiles? The thing really looks a lot like the little green things we had during WW II, so it must really be one of the little green things we had during WW II...

jeep.JPG
 
You forgot about Hummers. There are a few people around Tucson that drive the real MCcoy's. Not the Chevy knock offs.
The government has surplus sales all of the time. They sell tanks, ships and planes used in war.
 
The whole "weapons of war" is just another specious argument to placate the midwit crowd into thinking they're high IQ.

Ever look at the USML? Things the US government considers munitions and thus, "weapons of war" covers everything from radios, and many varieties of software, namely encryption software to be weapons of war, so the things we depend on to make e-commerce a viable system are weapons. 7t6p8x.jpg
 
The government has surplus sales all of the time. They sell tanks, ships and planes used in war.
Yes, but dam-ned few Americans can afford to buy and maintain an M1 Abrams MBT, a Nimitz-class aircraft carrier and a retired F-15 Strike Eagle. But they sure as helsinki can afford a "fully semi-matic, military-grade, combat-ready assault rifle with a 500-bullet clip and a silencer." Kyle Rittenhouse had one of those. Per the silencer, Kyle's rifle had the A2 "birdcage silencer." The "birdcage" is so effective that an entire "high-caliper clip" of 500 rounds could be fired-off in a small room in which a toddler is sleeping-- and the little guy would not be awakened. I know this to be true. David Hogg said so and as CNN and MSLSD told us, he's a "firearms expert," don'cha know. That everyday Americans can own such infinitely-powerful weapons that can kill innocent people by the hundreds of thousands in one shot makes Chucky Bullschumer lose control of his bowels in public places.

I calculated what would be the weight of 500 rounds of loaded 5.56 NATO ammo. It's something like twelve pounds. Any grunt would be overjoyed to carry that much weight-- plus all his other equips-- up the side of a hill while under fire.
 
Last Edited:
The whole "weapons of war" is just another specious argument to placate the midwit crowd into thinking they're high IQ.
I think the wacko libs use the phrase to keep stirred-up that cohort who protested against the Vietnam War. Also, to strike fear into our young 20-somethings who would be drafted if we ever had to defend our nation as we did during WW II. Y'gotta remember, "War is not healthy for children and other living things," so let's just avoid everything military...

War is not healthy - small.jpg
 

New Resource Reviews

Back Top