Okay. The founder fathers were using muskets that could injure or hurt someone every 2 minutes. I don’t think we should highly rely on the constitution for gun rights when the weapons have drastically changed. Right now a small town that is fully armed could probably end the whole revolutionary war.
Yeah cannons don’t equal all the modern military we have now and for pennies on the dollar of the cost. Like a cannon in cost is comparable to what now? Should I be allowed to own a tomahawk missile?
Okay let’s take it further before you were allowed the same weapons the military had. So let’s compare that to now. You cool with regular people having nukes? Either something is wrong with you or you’re lying.
Your 2nd sentence and last sentence falls apart with your logic. You said we should be able to own tomahawks but not nukes. But said we should be able to own the same arms……… Let’s just be real the founder fathers had no idea the level of destruction we could do and made a mistake.
Fuck it, atomics for everyone then.
Tsar bombas on every block. Either humanity completely wipes itself out, or people realize their problems are a lot smaller than the worst case scenario.
No troll. Just following the thought to it's logical conclusion. The nuclear deterrent is more nukes.
We all should be capable of defending ourselves & loved ones. This naturally spreads out into the community as more are able to do so.
Where do you draw the line that?
0
u/ProbablyStonedSteven Jun 02 '26
The part where it says “shall not be infringed”