Any of you lads have magazine subscriptions? Any recommendations?

Imagine being this big a cuck

>durrrhurrr debate me!
Nobody cares you entitled retard

I guess I win again
:^)

Me and millions of other people are willing to fight and die for our God given right to bear arms, baitfag. I fucking dare you to try gun grabbing.

No, you'll just mumble something about a boating accident and then let the officers into your house.

what do you think your glock is worth against an abrams tank or a drone you retard larper?

well regulated

read the fucking amendment

Attached: ontologicool.jpg (1944x1296, 400K)

Comic LO

Go tell this to /k/

In an environment (the US) in which guns currently exist, removing guns suddenly would be disastrous. This would basically defang law-abiding citizens while giving people, here by default criminals, a massive power advantage over the citizenry.

Probably a meme post, but it is essential for the health of any democracy to have an armed populace. As part of the social contract, the governed have an essential right to take back the reigns of power when they are abused.

>but it is essential for the health of any democracy to have an armed populace
burgers, never change

>I need muh 9mm handgun so I can overthrow the United States military
>what do you mean they have drones and APCs?
retard

Imagine a band of fat, middle-ages NRA members with AR-15s in open rebellion in a US city. Enter literally thousands of highly trained and seasoned killers with the best guns, gear, and vehicles on the planet. Who do you expect to win? The "well-armed" populace, or the most powerful military in the history of humanity?

The notion that a bunch of tough guy citizen warriors could overthrow the US government should be in a textbook on delusional thinking.

And before you say it, the colonies overthrowing their British rulers is so vastly different that I probably shouldn't even mention.

I suppose I didn't properly expand on this in my post. By arming the general population you create an enormous deterrent against tyranny As mentions, boomers with assault rifles dont stand much of a chance against the force of the US military. But how are the armed forces going to react to being ordered to open fire on the very citizens they are supposed to be protecting? Many who argue against gun rights state that even citizens armed with "assault rifles" stand no chance against drones or bombs, but no government seeking control will bomb it's own population and infrastructure. Disarming the population would allow an oppressive regime to take power without bloodshed, adding to their legitimacy.

Then why should the government (a collection of private citizens) have access to them?

>yeah dude the military (who will definitely side with the government lol) will absolutely drone strike every single citizen in the country
no

This is the dumbest thing I've read all day.

so then it should be easy to refute

>believe in freedom of speech
>but not a right to bear arms
What are you going to do when the government (or any substantial power really) takes away your rights? Ask nicely that they give them back? And when they say "No fuck you, you no longer have rights."?
That's why citizens ought to be armed with all manner of weapons. To act as a protection of fundamental human rights. Self defense and hunting are an added bonus.

Well regulated has a different meaning today, as do most of the phrases in the 2A. It refers to the operations of a specific thing, as in its ability to function properly. See here: constitution.org/cons/wellregu.htm
So that's not a sound argument, you fucking faggot.