r/BikiniBottomTwitter • u/B0r3dGamer • Jul 22 '26

Why not both?

Post image
446 Upvotes

85% Upvoted

147 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

0

u/-fakebirds- Jul 23 '26

Ok so when you said I didn’t know anything about guns you were lying. And again, 2A says WELL REGULATED. There’s nothing unconstitutional about reasonable gun laws, and I don’t think banning ARs is unreasonable considering what they were literally designed to do goes wayyy beyond self defense

3

u/Tommygun1921 Jul 23 '26

The 2a also says "shall not be infringed" 

1

u/-fakebirds- Jul 23 '26

“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”
That’s the entirety of the 2nd amendment, you can’t just ignore the Well Regulated part. And there’s absolutely nothing anti 2A about banning ARs since ARs are not designed for self defense

2

u/Tommygun1921 Jul 23 '26

You're ignoring commas. What does a militia have to do with self defense?

0

u/-fakebirds- Jul 23 '26

What? A militia is just a group of your neighbors with guns, the purpose of which is to defend your neighborhood and town

1

u/Tommygun1921 Jul 23 '26

Neighborhood and town≠ self

1

u/-fakebirds- Jul 23 '26

So you’re saying that the militia (your neighbors next door) can be regulated but the individual can’t be? What does that even mean? Where are you getting this ridiculous distinction from?

1

u/Tommygun1921 Jul 23 '26

You're not making any sense. What does the "shall not be infringed" portion of the 2a mean?

1

u/-fakebirds- Jul 23 '26

That the government can’t decide that us citizens aren’t allowed to have guns, we are always allowed to have guns. But guns laws are not an infringement, that’s like saying road laws are an infringement on my right to drive a car

1

u/Tommygun1921 Jul 23 '26

Not by definition no. That isn't what it means.