Two questions

A man 'o war with a dozen cannon along the broadside was cutting edge tech and can bombard the fuck out of a harbor.

I think a municipality owning anuke defeats the point. Would have to be an individual or a militia, definitely not a government entity.

They couldn't have predicted this fucking shitshow that we're all posting on right now, but here we are with 1st amendment protection. Same should apply to all amendments.

Yeah and regular people owned cannons.

someone photoship an elephant in the background and then post it on twitter claiming it's Boogie2988

If you were a real fucking badass in the 1700s you could kill 3 people before being BTFO by a mob.

A single person also couldn't lug a fucking canon around, load it, and then fire upon a crowd.

I think its really funny you can buy old military planes and guns that went on them but if you try to fully restore them and use them, it gets super illegal super fast hahahaha

A township isn't state or federal government.

I'm unfamiliar with that detail/precaution, but I think that would be an argument against nuclear weapons and high explosives since they can pose the risk of eliminating entire cities.

As far as NFA shit though like machine guns, suppressors, DD's, SBR/SBS, and AOW's restrictions should be removed. Ultimately if a society is going to be as successful as the country was intended to be then you need a high degree of personal responsibility. Replacing community enforced morality with govt mandates is a surefire way to see personal responsibility erode and problems, such as mass shootings, only worsen. The solution is either place blame solely on the aggressor and enable people to defend themselves, or place people solely dependent on govt, and court precedent has already shown that the govt has no legal responsibility to protect people.

Attached: 1563888477132.jpg (563x450, 42K)

>Cannon is not really shit. Too cumbersome to do any damage with. These edgy fags we have now could get 4 kills with it at best then get BTFO
nonsense
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M65_atomic_cannon

Maybe 200 years from now there will be speech that can literally kill people.

The founding fathers weren't infallible. These were great men, but they couldn't predict the future. Maybe we have come t a point where we must accept dominence of the government in exchange for safety.

I'm talking about the 1700s you turbonigger

this reads like a liberal trying to parody actual gun owners fucking kys

I trust my buddy with a nuke more than I trust (((the government))) with a nuke

good thing the ATF doesn't have air defense systems

Attached: 1565240219968m.jpg (621x1024, 89K)

then I could kill 30-50 people with grapeshot

Poe's Law, nigger. Seriously though, I'm being genuine. The nuke might be a little extreme but my god if you can afford it you should be able to own it.

>what is grape shot
>what is a shell
>what is shrapnel

There are many different loads a cannon can fire, many of which are aimed at killing people, think of the cannon like a giant shotgun that can fire all kinds of things.

>eye rolls in Patrick Henry

you realize that private citizens owned ships armed with canons right?

A single person could have had a 25 shot air rifle though.

What if they brought 4 guns?

ah yes, let's just up item #2 on the list of freedoms for public safety. it's definitely the top thing to worry about

Attached: 1920px-Leading_cause_of_death_world.png (1920x1854, 381K)

Yeah they actually did.... Not everyone though, because they were expensive and not exactly a necessity. But a private citizen had the ability to own the same military tech that the government did up until the fucking 1920s

do cops frown upon AA cannons on your roof?

Attached: Ian's ride to prom.png (1200x695, 444K)

Yes, because it's irresponsible to not have
proper supports to ensure structural integrity

>park it in the driveway
Gotcha

haha whoops how silly, I posted (World) instead of (US). They look so close I get them mixed up

Attached: db328_fig4.gif (561x340, 9K)

Then you block your armored vehicles from access to the garage. I'd recommend emplacements in the front and/or backyard

Actually, the garage is a separate building with an underground tunnel that connects to the main house.

I'd like to have a Panther tank. Or Tiger. But the mark 5, not the Royal Tiger.

Recreational McNukes.
Seriously. By the Supreme Courts own definition by Heller, the ONLY arms protected by the second are military in nature, and are tied to exactly what the current capabilities of our military are. So I'll take a Hind and vehicle mounted Gauss cannon, please and thank you.

Attached: ancap ball.png (549x413, 164K)

I can mount a howitzer on my roof if I want. Eat shit faggots.

Fuck cannons, they had the Puckle.

Attached: cantfucklethepuckle.png (614x523, 713K)

fuck you SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED

Attached: 1565377885433s.jpg (250x208, 5K)

PDX?

Well regulated

I just don't want to pay the stupid ATF fee and deal the licensing. I looked into it, because I wanted to play around with semtex and build a hell cannon legally. You can totally do it, but it gives them basically unrestricted access to your shit 24/7, and they make you build a magazine and shit. Apparently it's not good enough to keep it in a chest freezer. I asked, and they said no.

1. If the military has it, civilans should have access to it. Period.
2. It's not a question of allowing things or not. The Bill of Rights does not give rights, it restricts the government. All gun laws are illegal under the 2nd amendment.
In other words:
SHALL

TO KEEP

I will murder you with your own fucking dick you cock mongling faggot. I am so sick of seeing this stupid as shit argument, because you can't with words.

Attached: 1565334082112.jpg (712x1096, 303K)

I refuse to believe you haven't had this shit explained to you yet so I'm just going to give you your (You) and tell you you're a gigantic faggot.

>that pic

Attached: 1207317120197.jpg (300x498, 34K)

Basically yeah

The militia is called upon and commanded by the state governor to protect the state and in some cases can be called upon and commanded by the president. To defend the state or the federal government.

Or boat defense systems

Attached: tragicboatingaccident.jpg (800x450, 435K)

NOT

So who decides that the equipment is well regulated and if no one then what's the point of stating that.

I've met complete morons that don't know how to boil water that can legally buy a gun. Being able to figure out how the trigger works is beyond them let alone keeping anything in good working order

"THE"

you should be able to buy anything that the military can buy. from a beretta 9mm to an AC-130 gunship.

It's not about the equipment, it's about the people.

No we need common sense weapon laws. Citizens should be restricted to weapons with an effective range of 12km or less and a killing radius of 40m or less.

>we
Don't lump americans in with draconian anti-gun anglo views.

1. There is no “most and least restrictive interpretation.” There is only one valid interpretation: the people have the right to keep and bear any arms they choose, and this right shall not be infringed in any way. Every gun control law/regulation is an unconstitutional infringement.
2. All individuals should have the full and un-infringed right to keep and bear any arm they choose

I know at least a few here are pretending to be restarted, but...

The organised militia, known as the national guard are the ones that secure and keep the 2nd amendment arms, including tanks, heavy weaponry, etc in "well regulated" condition and order.

One may keep and use personal weaponry as the unorganized militia, yet still under the command of the state governor.

You want to contribute as unorganized militia? Learn how to operate a tank so if the leafs invade Texas you can be prepared to be called upon using something fun. If ya show up with a rusty potato gun expect to be called into service to peel potatoes to help feed the non morons.

Course we already lost once to the leafs so....

better to recess the emplacement inside a structure so it can be concealed and activated in an ambush

Well regulated people? Same question, who regulated people?

>Objectively speaking, where are the boundaries of the 2nd amendment?

Whatever you can afford

>Can you drive around with a 20mm bolt action in your truck, or slung over your back? can you put a 40mm in your front yard?

I mean, if you're rich enough to buy a M242 Bushmaster, I don't see why you shouldn't be able to.

>being able to afford atomic weapons
>not investing in safety

Attached: Racial Revolution.gif (316x180, 3.97M)

>hurr durr cannon in yard
How about to fight a tyrannical government. To defend family, myself, or property. To hunt with. To target shoot or clay shoot. To have historical relics.

Attached: DSCF0326.jpg (1600x1200, 606K)

How can you say this seriesly
Govs at least have the world and their citizens to answer to.
Dave who holds the keys to the town nuke who goes off the rails when his wife cheats on him with Tony who is mayor of the white neighbouring city and his two beautiful white kids die in a freak wind storm accident when a branch decapitated both of them might give no fucks about nuking Tony's city even though the fallout would kill him and everyone in his own city.

Most restrictive interpretation is the dumbass misinterpretation that militia means army and that the amendment onky guarantees weapons to the military.
Least reatrictive interpretation is recreational nuclear weapons

The people themselves fool, have you never heard of personal responsibility?

Yeah I’m sure they would use the 2nd amendment to justify a power grab, the complete fucking opposite of the thing they wrote about

nukes don't exist anyway so it's fine

Define weapon

It’s more fundamental. The original idea was that the government would have NO force of its own. If they wanted to use force, they woul have to get the assistance of the people.

go fuck a dingo, you descendant of criminal bongs

youtube.com/watch?v=A0CKq0xRu2k

youtube.com/watch?v=RR5BtXP0s0o

why we need civilian owned rpg
youtube.com/watch?v=fQQzg2VfJME

honestly why not air craft carriers

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merchant_aircraft_carrier

im not even kidding anything another human can have, the governments of the world must not be allowed a monopoly on force

Attached: godblessamerica.jpg (999x420, 77K)

Arms

this, why dont people get it

The burger flippers, homeless junkies, basketball Americans in Chicago that simply cross a state line to purchase a gun, a fully armed antifa protest.

Which people and what level of personal responsibility are we talking about?

legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/arms

ARMS. Any thing that a man wears for his defence, or takes in his hands, or uses in his anger, to cast at, or strike at another. Co. Litt. 161 b, 162 a; Crompt. Just. P. 65; Cunn. Dict. h.t.
2. The Constitution of the United States, Amendm. art. 2, declares, "that 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." In Kentucky, a statute "to prevent persons from wearing concealed arms," has been declared to be unconstitutional; 2 Litt. R. 90; while in Indiana a similar statute has been holden valid and constitutional. 3 Blackf. R. 229. Vide Story, Const. Sec. 1889, 1890 Amer. Citizen, 176; 1 Tuck. Black. App. 300 Rawle on Const. 125.

I get that, but you can't go back in time, the world's changed.
Without the gov you would be run by megacorporations totally and who would stop them? So you get a few thousand people together with guns then try to take on Amazon HQ and they sent their drones out and firebomb you all.
Then what?

and a tank is hard to operate with one person
did you have a point?

Attached: 1543061668011.png (794x807, 378K)

Attached: dronegun.jpg (1050x700, 250K)

Welp that first part just described my left testicle on multiple levels

im just gonna guess somthing like this would fuck a drone up, im no expert tho

fear-of-lightning.wonderhowto.com/how-to/making-electromagnetic-weapons-directed-microwave-energy-0133231/

Only the whites, niggers don't have rights and belong in Africa, but otherwise all of them, and yet none of them, and the only level of personal responsibility that matters, the one where you are responsible for yourself, not little johnny, you, and only you are responsible for yourself.

our founding fathers would say if you can build a tank or buy one, and have some fellow patriots to help operate it, hell yea go for it

Attached: 1541227386355.jpg (640x864, 165K)

well then your government should stop being king geirge 4: electric boogalor and let you organize right wing de... uh- meet up groups

Is he hunting rednecks or is he a redneck who happens to be a hunter?

>security of a free state

Militia defends the state, not fight against it

a countries people should have equal power to its government. If its banned and the government has it, then its not really banned

Attached: 1564417998702.png (716x714, 874K)

>we
Don't lump us in with you you bootlicking anglo kangaroo fucker, we're not interested in your nanny state bullshit.

Youd have to be pretty damn rich or pretty damn smart to get one so, let that be the self serve background check

Yes.

Attached: Screenshot_2019-08-10-01-35-32-1.png (720x1230, 261K)

Originally there were no boundaries. If a private citizen could afford a cannon or a mortar, he could have one.
All military equipment was available to the population.

"well regulated militia" refers to a properly outfitted and trained group."Regulated" meant healthy, and in proper working order.

Should Elon Musk be *allowed* to go to Mars?

Attached: dscf0031.jpg (2136x2848, 985K)

Be on tank crew made up of Walmart greeters.

Look at min wage lil Johnny in charge of tank crew.

Fuck everyone else, I don't care wtf the driver, Gunner, reloader, comms, or anyone else is doing, going to do it the "right way" cause my responsibility.

Leafs win a second war against us.

So much winning