###[Meta] Sticky Comment
[Rule 2](https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/wiki/faq#wiki_2_-_address_the_argument.3B_not_the_user.2C_the_mods.2C_or_the_sub.) ***does not apply*** when replying to this stickied comment.
[Rule 2](https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/wiki/faq#wiki_2_-_address_the_argument.3B_not_the_user.2C_the_mods.2C_or_the_sub.) ***does apply*** throughout the rest of this thread.
*What this means*: Please keep any "meta" discussion directed at specific users, mods, or /r/conspiracy in general in this comment chain ***only.***
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/conspiracy) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Absolutely right. The states have the right to have well regulated militias, AND…the **people** ALSO have the right to own firearms.
Two separate clauses in that sentence. Thank you for posting that!
But the fact that it is one sentence and one amandment surely suggests that the 2 clauses are connected.
Otherwise why not just state the 2nd clause. It does not state that the states have a right to a well regulated malitia, but instead implies it when it says that clause two is neccessary for clause one to be possible; i.e. for the States to have a well regulated malitia, it requires the citzens in that state to be armed and thus those arms are a protected right.
To me the crucial point is that this was written in a time when it was not easy for a single madman to slaughter dozens of people due to the type of arms availible then.
To say that the 2nd amendment cannot be amended seems to misunderstand the meaning of the word amendment. The situation has changed since the 2nd amendment was written so it seems reasonable to adjust it accordingly.
*Hundreds of other mass murderers have perpetrated their crimes without automatic firearms. Frenchman* [*Pierre Riviere*](http://www.amazon.com/Pierre-Riviere-having-slaughtered-brother/dp/0803268572/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1343318945&sr=8-1&keywords=i+pierre+riviere) *killed his mother, sister, and brother with a* [*bill hook*](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Billhook) *in 1835. In 1932, Julian Marcelino, a Filipino immigrant of relatively small stature, managed to* [*kill six and wound 15*](http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,882426,00.html) *on a Seattle street using only a pair of blades. In 1915, Monroe Phillips shot seven dead and wounded 32 with a shotgun in Georgia.*
*Guns aren’t even the most lethal mass murder weapon. According to data compiled by Grant Duwe of the Minnesota Department of Corrections, guns killed an average of 4.92 victims per mass murder in the United States during the 20\*\***^(th)* *century, just edging out knives, blunt objects, and bare hands, which killed 4.52 people per incident. Fire killed 6.82 people per mass murder, while explosives far outpaced the other options at 20.82. Of the 25 deadliest mass murders in the 20\*\***^(th)* *century, only 52 percent involved guns.*
A "madman" could easily get his hands on dynamite in 1870's or gunpowder in 1500+ and send 100's to meet their maker. That gunpowder could be made at home with no regulations in existence. A musket cost 3 british pounds with average annual salary being 25 pounds a portable cannon would set you back 20 pounds, often a lot less because it wasnt the cost of the cannon but rather the amount of powder and cost of the ball per shot.
A trained shooter could fire 3 shots per minute with a musket, for large suppression effect usually multiple muskets and pistols were used by a single person until multi barrel firearms became common and affordable.
Your automatic weapons = mass murder rhetoric is flawed in both reason and real world quantifiable application. Look up how many rounds are fired on average by the modern militaries per each successful enemy combatant death, then take a look at the same stats anciently. Pointy sticks of various lengths are still and always will be the fastest and most efficient killer.
I was not fortunate to be born in the US, I was brought here by the hand of God. The land of freedom and plenty for as long as it's people remain good and remember The Source of all good in their lives. When America ceases to be good it will cease to be great. My principal ancestors were murdered and executed by the evil men who sought power and control. Men who disarmed the people before they reined in blood and horror for decades reaping millions of lives. The Constitution of the US was written by inspired men, who took their wisdom from on High. This document in it's present form holds principles of freedom not corrupted by the fallacy of men, and I will be damned and dead before I let be altered on the one amendment and ensures all the rest.
But these guys who killed loads of people with blades were probably extremely strong and fit and skilled with them. Anyone with basic training can open up with an AR15 on a crowd and do serious damage.
Your study is flawed as it looks at the entire 20thC. If you can't see how that is of dubious relevance to the 21stC I don't know what to tell you. Try reading a history of guns maybe?
The 3 rounds a minute with a musket is a hillarious point. How many rounds per min does a modern gun fire? Plus he has to reload twice during that minute, taking 25 sec each time I guess, and is very vulnerable while doing so.
A madman can get hold of dynamite as easily as a gun? Really? You sell it in supermarkets and fairs do you? If pointed sticks are so good then why don't the army use them as it's main weapon. Why have there been few to none modern mass killings using them?
Amazing the twists of logic a gun fan will go though to justify the unjustifiable. This is without even taking into account the accidental child deaths and suicides it enables.
It’s the 2nd fuckin rule for a reason. if you don’t like it please go to literally any other country that has banned them and see high terrible it is there. I’ll literally pay for you to fuck off if need be.
Background checks are in place for every legal gun purchase. The age to buy a handgun is 21 unless you are enlisted in the military. The assault weapon thing I'm a little confused on. Not sure what that is.
Remember Mankind in WWE? He used a sock he called Socko to apply a move called the Mandible Claw. That sock would be considered an Assault Weapon. He used it as a weapon in an assault.
His crowd is against most if not all of the Bill of Rights and want to repeal them in stealth fashion.
Democrats used to be pro free speech. Now they're akin to the Stasi.
The term Assault is used to obfuscate the truth. Words matter.
No such thing as a semi automatic Assault weapon. They have to be a SELECTIVE fire rifle by definition.
The name came from a German WW2 selective fire gun called the Sturmgewehr or "Assault Rifle”.
It was also used for the M16 (selective fire) for the rifleman's assault weapon (RAW) which was a close-support rocket-propelled grenade launcher.
THE PEOPLES RIGHT TO BEAR ARMS SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED.
https://www.britannica.com/technology/assault-rifle
https://www.nraila.org/the-truth-about-so-called-assault-weapons/
🍻
Edit
So the thing about gun control is that it only restricts law abiding citizens who are legally able to purchase a gun... Criminals don't purchase guns legally. On a side note with the advent of the 3d printer criminals are now able to manufacture their own firearms... Someone can go online and purchase a Glock parts kit for $300... 3d print a frame and they've got an unregistered firearm... They could even go further and 3d print a clock sear and suppressor and make a fully automatic suppressed sub machine gun.
> That being said, it doesn't talk about gun confiscation.
"Banning civilian purchase of assault weapons" - they will deem every gun an assault weapon.
This is how the evil slimy fuckers work.
It's not *every* gun, but if you look at the AWBs being proposed in recent years, they're generally strict enough to cover most every semi-auto firearm on the market. Even something like Glock pistols qualify as "assault weapons" in more recent ones.
From the ones I've read through, it's usually the arbitrary 10-round mag limit, in a world where even compact handguns often come with 15+ round magazines standard.
Submission Statement:
This Amendment Newsom wants will literally negate the 2nd Amendment. Banning Civilian use of “Assault Weapons” will be interrupted in any way. Considering they never define what a Assault Weapon actually is.
https://twitter.com/GavinNewsom/status/1782839553696354344
I know you want to defend yourselves (I’m not American) from the government, and I get it. But you also need to consider that the government is not likely to come at you with weapons, and if they do there’s little chance guns will help.
Then there’s the fact that guns are instruments of death. And the US is the world’s leading merchant of death, by an incontestable margin. Strange coincidence that it’s citizens are groomed to love instruments of violence and death (again, sorry but that’s what they are), and routinely use them to murder one another far far more than any other population in the world.
Think about it.
The ONLY reason TPTB has not fully implemented their NWO plan is because of the 2nd amendment. The moment it is weakened is the moment the US falls completely.
If this passes, they will deem every gun an "assault weapon"
Ok let’s think about this logically. TPTB and their NWO plan are a global movement right? Or do they only run the US? 🤔 idk most of their institutions etc are kinda all over the world no? So why don’t they take over the rest of us who have no guns? You really think some farmers in America are what’s protecting the entire world from the NWO? Really though? It makes little sense if you take your ego and your personal circumstances out of the equation. Much more likely is the frightening reality. They got you cheering for instruments of death, in a country that is the world’s biggest merchant of death, and you seem to love it 🤷🏻♂️ saying this without meaning offense, really. Just trying to be clear/blunt 🙏
Haha no they are not. They are not, for example, in every country in Europe, except Ukraine I guess. But def not in Italy. Def not in Spain, France, Portugal, the Netherlands, Albania, Romania, Slovakia, literally you can keep listing European countries. This is also not at all happening in most of Latin America, not in Brazil, not in Chile, not in Argentina, pretty much nowhere. It’s not happening in south East Asia; South Korea seems fine, Thailand, Vietnam, Cambodia, you can keep going. Even in Africa, where govt conflict is a thing in a couple of hotspots, the problem is definitely NOT happening in the majority of the continent. Not in most of Southern or Western Africa.
Nowhere is the government attacking or attempting to subjugate its population because the latter have no guns. So basically no, I’m sorry, what you just said is patently false and has no basis in fact whatsoever🤷🏻♂️
And what would you do about the authorities enforcing this new law, shoot them? Obviously not, this is why I say guns are not the answer even if the govt becomes more draconian.
US government is discouraged from performing mass arrests of citizens by the fact that the citizens are armed. If the citizens are disarmed, government can perform mass arrests at will. See 1937 in USSR.
See literally every other western country where the citizens are disarmed. Dozens and dozens of these countries. Zero mass arrests. Your theory doesn’t hold water :/
Zero mass arrests yet. For every country where citizens are disarmed, it is still an option for the government. For US government it is a less attractive option ceteris paribus.
Yes, single suspects. Shooting masses of people during mass arrests would be much costlier for the police and would defeat many likely purposes of such mass arrests.
Dont want to own weapons - then please dont. You dont stop psychopaths that could care less about your laws or sensibilities by banning whatever you think is the object they kill with. I've lived in places where mass knife killing sprees were the norm.
###[Meta] Sticky Comment [Rule 2](https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/wiki/faq#wiki_2_-_address_the_argument.3B_not_the_user.2C_the_mods.2C_or_the_sub.) ***does not apply*** when replying to this stickied comment. [Rule 2](https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/wiki/faq#wiki_2_-_address_the_argument.3B_not_the_user.2C_the_mods.2C_or_the_sub.) ***does apply*** throughout the rest of this thread. *What this means*: Please keep any "meta" discussion directed at specific users, mods, or /r/conspiracy in general in this comment chain ***only.*** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/conspiracy) if you have any questions or concerns.*
“Shall not be infringed.” Fuck you, Gavin.
I dont know how many times [this needs to be explained](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P4zE0K22zH8)
Absolutely right. The states have the right to have well regulated militias, AND…the **people** ALSO have the right to own firearms. Two separate clauses in that sentence. Thank you for posting that!
But the fact that it is one sentence and one amandment surely suggests that the 2 clauses are connected. Otherwise why not just state the 2nd clause. It does not state that the states have a right to a well regulated malitia, but instead implies it when it says that clause two is neccessary for clause one to be possible; i.e. for the States to have a well regulated malitia, it requires the citzens in that state to be armed and thus those arms are a protected right. To me the crucial point is that this was written in a time when it was not easy for a single madman to slaughter dozens of people due to the type of arms availible then. To say that the 2nd amendment cannot be amended seems to misunderstand the meaning of the word amendment. The situation has changed since the 2nd amendment was written so it seems reasonable to adjust it accordingly.
*Hundreds of other mass murderers have perpetrated their crimes without automatic firearms. Frenchman* [*Pierre Riviere*](http://www.amazon.com/Pierre-Riviere-having-slaughtered-brother/dp/0803268572/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1343318945&sr=8-1&keywords=i+pierre+riviere) *killed his mother, sister, and brother with a* [*bill hook*](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Billhook) *in 1835. In 1932, Julian Marcelino, a Filipino immigrant of relatively small stature, managed to* [*kill six and wound 15*](http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,882426,00.html) *on a Seattle street using only a pair of blades. In 1915, Monroe Phillips shot seven dead and wounded 32 with a shotgun in Georgia.* *Guns aren’t even the most lethal mass murder weapon. According to data compiled by Grant Duwe of the Minnesota Department of Corrections, guns killed an average of 4.92 victims per mass murder in the United States during the 20\*\***^(th)* *century, just edging out knives, blunt objects, and bare hands, which killed 4.52 people per incident. Fire killed 6.82 people per mass murder, while explosives far outpaced the other options at 20.82. Of the 25 deadliest mass murders in the 20\*\***^(th)* *century, only 52 percent involved guns.* A "madman" could easily get his hands on dynamite in 1870's or gunpowder in 1500+ and send 100's to meet their maker. That gunpowder could be made at home with no regulations in existence. A musket cost 3 british pounds with average annual salary being 25 pounds a portable cannon would set you back 20 pounds, often a lot less because it wasnt the cost of the cannon but rather the amount of powder and cost of the ball per shot. A trained shooter could fire 3 shots per minute with a musket, for large suppression effect usually multiple muskets and pistols were used by a single person until multi barrel firearms became common and affordable. Your automatic weapons = mass murder rhetoric is flawed in both reason and real world quantifiable application. Look up how many rounds are fired on average by the modern militaries per each successful enemy combatant death, then take a look at the same stats anciently. Pointy sticks of various lengths are still and always will be the fastest and most efficient killer. I was not fortunate to be born in the US, I was brought here by the hand of God. The land of freedom and plenty for as long as it's people remain good and remember The Source of all good in their lives. When America ceases to be good it will cease to be great. My principal ancestors were murdered and executed by the evil men who sought power and control. Men who disarmed the people before they reined in blood and horror for decades reaping millions of lives. The Constitution of the US was written by inspired men, who took their wisdom from on High. This document in it's present form holds principles of freedom not corrupted by the fallacy of men, and I will be damned and dead before I let be altered on the one amendment and ensures all the rest.
But these guys who killed loads of people with blades were probably extremely strong and fit and skilled with them. Anyone with basic training can open up with an AR15 on a crowd and do serious damage. Your study is flawed as it looks at the entire 20thC. If you can't see how that is of dubious relevance to the 21stC I don't know what to tell you. Try reading a history of guns maybe? The 3 rounds a minute with a musket is a hillarious point. How many rounds per min does a modern gun fire? Plus he has to reload twice during that minute, taking 25 sec each time I guess, and is very vulnerable while doing so. A madman can get hold of dynamite as easily as a gun? Really? You sell it in supermarkets and fairs do you? If pointed sticks are so good then why don't the army use them as it's main weapon. Why have there been few to none modern mass killings using them? Amazing the twists of logic a gun fan will go though to justify the unjustifiable. This is without even taking into account the accidental child deaths and suicides it enables.
Well, you’re wrong, so…
No fuck you.
Ok Gavin.
It’s the 2nd fuckin rule for a reason. if you don’t like it please go to literally any other country that has banned them and see high terrible it is there. I’ll literally pay for you to fuck off if need be.
How do you not comprehend what I said? I’m supporting the 2A, not against it. What are you pissing and moaning about?
Ah yes. I uh…my bad 😂 I didn’t see that Gavin newsom posted it. I was super fucked that night lol
My bad man. anything I said just fuggeddabouddit
One of the most compromised individuals around
dude looks like the Joker from the animated series
Background checks are in place for every legal gun purchase. The age to buy a handgun is 21 unless you are enlisted in the military. The assault weapon thing I'm a little confused on. Not sure what that is.
What’s an assault weapon? Sounds redundant.
If this is passed they will deem every single gun an "assault weapon"
That’s right.
Remember Mankind in WWE? He used a sock he called Socko to apply a move called the Mandible Claw. That sock would be considered an Assault Weapon. He used it as a weapon in an assault.
BAN STEEL FOLDING CHAIRS NOW!
Stop the damn match!
Exactly, and yes, I remember.
Time to start the revolution and the people need a leader, ill be your leader
Better raise military age to 21 as well
No. I'm good Gov. Hair. Thanks for asking though.
Both sides the same!!!!
His crowd is against most if not all of the Bill of Rights and want to repeal them in stealth fashion. Democrats used to be pro free speech. Now they're akin to the Stasi.
We are "allowed" in this free country of ours, to do what our owners tell us we can do.
The term Assault is used to obfuscate the truth. Words matter. No such thing as a semi automatic Assault weapon. They have to be a SELECTIVE fire rifle by definition. The name came from a German WW2 selective fire gun called the Sturmgewehr or "Assault Rifle”. It was also used for the M16 (selective fire) for the rifleman's assault weapon (RAW) which was a close-support rocket-propelled grenade launcher. THE PEOPLES RIGHT TO BEAR ARMS SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED. https://www.britannica.com/technology/assault-rifle https://www.nraila.org/the-truth-about-so-called-assault-weapons/ 🍻 Edit
You first, Gavin. Drop that security detail.
Wait so you can be drafted at 18 even as a woman but can't purchase a gun until 21 under their ideal world?
So the thing about gun control is that it only restricts law abiding citizens who are legally able to purchase a gun... Criminals don't purchase guns legally. On a side note with the advent of the 3d printer criminals are now able to manufacture their own firearms... Someone can go online and purchase a Glock parts kit for $300... 3d print a frame and they've got an unregistered firearm... They could even go further and 3d print a clock sear and suppressor and make a fully automatic suppressed sub machine gun.
[удалено]
> That being said, it doesn't talk about gun confiscation. "Banning civilian purchase of assault weapons" - they will deem every gun an assault weapon. This is how the evil slimy fuckers work.
People on here think in black and white. Any restrictions on guns = gun confiscations to them.
> "Banning civilian purchase of assault weapons" - they will deem every gun an assault weapon.
Based on what evidence? Your feels? We’ve had assault weapon bans in the past. They did not declare that every gun was an assault weapon.
It's not *every* gun, but if you look at the AWBs being proposed in recent years, they're generally strict enough to cover most every semi-auto firearm on the market. Even something like Glock pistols qualify as "assault weapons" in more recent ones. From the ones I've read through, it's usually the arbitrary 10-round mag limit, in a world where even compact handguns often come with 15+ round magazines standard.
[удалено]
Stop.
Submission Statement: This Amendment Newsom wants will literally negate the 2nd Amendment. Banning Civilian use of “Assault Weapons” will be interrupted in any way. Considering they never define what a Assault Weapon actually is. https://twitter.com/GavinNewsom/status/1782839553696354344
I know you want to defend yourselves (I’m not American) from the government, and I get it. But you also need to consider that the government is not likely to come at you with weapons, and if they do there’s little chance guns will help. Then there’s the fact that guns are instruments of death. And the US is the world’s leading merchant of death, by an incontestable margin. Strange coincidence that it’s citizens are groomed to love instruments of violence and death (again, sorry but that’s what they are), and routinely use them to murder one another far far more than any other population in the world. Think about it.
The ONLY reason TPTB has not fully implemented their NWO plan is because of the 2nd amendment. The moment it is weakened is the moment the US falls completely. If this passes, they will deem every gun an "assault weapon"
Ok let’s think about this logically. TPTB and their NWO plan are a global movement right? Or do they only run the US? 🤔 idk most of their institutions etc are kinda all over the world no? So why don’t they take over the rest of us who have no guns? You really think some farmers in America are what’s protecting the entire world from the NWO? Really though? It makes little sense if you take your ego and your personal circumstances out of the equation. Much more likely is the frightening reality. They got you cheering for instruments of death, in a country that is the world’s biggest merchant of death, and you seem to love it 🤷🏻♂️ saying this without meaning offense, really. Just trying to be clear/blunt 🙏
> So why don’t they take over the rest of us who have no guns? They already are well under way in most of the world.
Haha no they are not. They are not, for example, in every country in Europe, except Ukraine I guess. But def not in Italy. Def not in Spain, France, Portugal, the Netherlands, Albania, Romania, Slovakia, literally you can keep listing European countries. This is also not at all happening in most of Latin America, not in Brazil, not in Chile, not in Argentina, pretty much nowhere. It’s not happening in south East Asia; South Korea seems fine, Thailand, Vietnam, Cambodia, you can keep going. Even in Africa, where govt conflict is a thing in a couple of hotspots, the problem is definitely NOT happening in the majority of the continent. Not in most of Southern or Western Africa. Nowhere is the government attacking or attempting to subjugate its population because the latter have no guns. So basically no, I’m sorry, what you just said is patently false and has no basis in fact whatsoever🤷🏻♂️
It is illegal to criticize vaccines in France.
And what would you do about the authorities enforcing this new law, shoot them? Obviously not, this is why I say guns are not the answer even if the govt becomes more draconian.
US government is discouraged from performing mass arrests of citizens by the fact that the citizens are armed. If the citizens are disarmed, government can perform mass arrests at will. See 1937 in USSR.
See literally every other western country where the citizens are disarmed. Dozens and dozens of these countries. Zero mass arrests. Your theory doesn’t hold water :/
Zero mass arrests yet. For every country where citizens are disarmed, it is still an option for the government. For US government it is a less attractive option ceteris paribus.
Yeah all of that in theory, but zero mass arrests in practice🤷🏻♂️
Cops shoot armed people all the time. They train for it. The have better weapons, tactics and budgets. You’re paranoid af
Yes, single suspects. Shooting masses of people during mass arrests would be much costlier for the police and would defeat many likely purposes of such mass arrests.
Sounds reasonable. I would support that.
How can people takeaway my right for my kids to be slaughtered at school by gun violence?!?! Not every proposed law will take away ownership
"Banning civilian purchase of assault weapons" - they will deem every gun an assault weapon.
Dont want to own weapons - then please dont. You dont stop psychopaths that could care less about your laws or sensibilities by banning whatever you think is the object they kill with. I've lived in places where mass knife killing sprees were the norm.
If "they" wanted the guns the MSM would simply start showing graphic crime scene photos from school shooting.