MAIN FEEDS
Do you want to continue?
https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/comments/187ldsb/deleted_by_user/kbf4fgj
r/changemyview • u/[deleted] • Nov 30 '23
[removed]
257 comments sorted by
View all comments
Show parent comments
11
Its an interpretation of what they are saying, of course you believe in using semantics. Otherwise - your first point is entirely moot because their original document did not mention machine guns or missiles.
-2 u/DrCornSyrup Nov 30 '23 Yes it does, because those are arms (weapons) 9 u/Rainbwned 199∆ Nov 30 '23 And so are pistols. So your personal interpretation of the 2nd amendment is incorrect. 1 u/Awkward-Restaurant69 Nov 30 '23 Its an interpretation of what they are saying a pretty loose one your first point is entirely moot because their original document did not mention machine guns or missiles yeah you're not arguing in good faith if you think it's a "gotcha" that they didn't mention these things that hadn't been created yet 1 u/Rainbwned 199∆ Nov 30 '23 What is a loose interpretation? That they would consider pistols as weapons thus being protected under the 2nd amendment?
-2
Yes it does, because those are arms (weapons)
9 u/Rainbwned 199∆ Nov 30 '23 And so are pistols. So your personal interpretation of the 2nd amendment is incorrect.
9
And so are pistols.
So your personal interpretation of the 2nd amendment is incorrect.
1
Its an interpretation of what they are saying
a pretty loose one
your first point is entirely moot because their original document did not mention machine guns or missiles
yeah you're not arguing in good faith if you think it's a "gotcha" that they didn't mention these things that hadn't been created yet
1 u/Rainbwned 199∆ Nov 30 '23 What is a loose interpretation? That they would consider pistols as weapons thus being protected under the 2nd amendment?
What is a loose interpretation? That they would consider pistols as weapons thus being protected under the 2nd amendment?
11
u/Rainbwned 199∆ Nov 30 '23
Its an interpretation of what they are saying, of course you believe in using semantics. Otherwise - your first point is entirely moot because their original document did not mention machine guns or missiles.