The time for gun law reform in America is now

here's the info graphic

Attached: niggers42.png (1281x728, 353.27K)

>Most damningly, the Second Amendment was made to fight against the federal government.
The real question is, if it is legal to own guns to fight a corrupt government, then why isn't it constitutuonal to attack the government? It's counterproductive to give citizens the tools to attack the government, but give the government better tools (IE taxpayer funded police and armies) to protect themselves.

The constitution should stipulate that neither police nor military nor any other government agency should be allowed to defend the government using taxpayer dollars. Politicians should be gunslingers and if anyone gets the drop on them, he takes their office.

whoops, jinxed me

No. We don't care what you think.

This.

Get outta here with this gun regulation shit

Attached: 1466548209359.png (1251x344, 172.58K)

My only hope is that the US population wakes up and stops being sheep and fights back against the NRA who is actively trying to flood communities with weapons of war. Stop supporting businesses that endorse the NRA and things will improve rapidly.

Don't make me post the post

You're right, but the proper term is "protected" our right to a warship rather than "allowed" us to. The Constitution is a list of rights granted by God, protected by the law, rather than a list of privileges the government gives us.

Attached: why gun rights.png (872x886, 219.82K)

You can if you have the money. Like tanks etc. You can't own a nuke or anything like that.

Puckle guns not gatling guns, but yeah.

Where can I buy a gun, legally, that fires 600 rounds a minute? please do tell.

Why does a canadian want to ban something in the US, perhaps we should lobby canada to ban hockey or maple syrup?

Ban murder?

Yes. And reform should go like this
1. No restrictions on full auto firearms as well as on melee weapons (like switchblades, swords, daggers, clubs, maces, etc).
2. Every person who passed the medical examination should have at least one handgun, one knife and one long barrel gun.
3. Each healthy human should go through the three month courses once in 3 years.

Shut the fuck up

When they wrote the second amendment a militia gun fired the same amount as a military gun.

Shouldn't civilians have fully automatic guns like the military ?

No its not now fuck off and mind your own business

The US was supposed to be a white nation as written in the constitution. Let's talk about that first.

>600+ rounds per minute

Attached: u29gp1tyknl11.jpg (800x479, 58.9K)

Mandatory citizen laser rifles militia

I don't think you can buy a M1 Abrams, its trimmings, and the ammunitions. Maybe WW2 era tanks as long as the weapons are deactivated, but not current gear.

>then why isn't it constitutuonal to attack the government?
It is.

Your countries absurd gun regulations cause big problems in my country. 80% of Canada's gun violence is from guns that were smuggled over the border from the US. I will never stop advocating for common sense gun laws in the US.

This shit argument again?

>they had gatling guns
The gatling gun wasn't around until the civil war. If you're trying to refer to the puckle gun, it wasn't an automatic or even semiautomatic gun. The puckle gun was just a crew served revolver.

Yes you can. If you have the money and proper license (which requires money). You can look on Youtube

Based!

We need to bring back the civil defense league

I should be able to h ave the exact same shit as the military. You know I can't even buy themals? Like everything is "military and law enfrocement use only" these days. It is outrageous.

Attached: aaf.png (680x709, 243.33K)

>Politicians should be gunslingers and if anyone gets the drop on them, he takes their office.
Best idea a leaf ever had right there.

The time for press law reform in America is now

Attached: 1583275911283-pol.jpg (406x668, 52.69K)

In the 1700s the state was using black powder muskets and the citizens were using them too.

In the 2000's the state was using assault rifles, and thus the citizens should have them too.

You see, my slide threading puke Canadian brother, the law is there so that the Citizens are a sufficient THREAT to the government that they don't go Julius Ceasar and form an Imperial Dictatorship.

Why is it that leftists don't know history and can't think from the oppositions perspective?

Attached: 1570033402145.jpg (595x599, 38.62K)

>Shouldn't our laws change?
No, and fuck you

You know that's not going to happen. Every dictator will immediately get started on protecting his position, which means bullshitting the democratic process and taking the guns.

In the past, they always changed the laws first, then came for the guns to ensure compliance with those laws, but that never worked. Since the 20th century, they've done it the other way around: take the guns or guilt people into giving up their guns, then legalize their dictatorship.

Point is, no government will comply with a rule that says "the government cannot defend itself." Government people will find a way to justify loading up on guns, so the only reasonable counter to that is to own guns yourself.

It's not constitutional to attack the government because if rebellion for any reason was legal, there would never be any government. The Founding Fathers knew rebellion would be illegal, but that's naturally the case. The idea was you own guns for "self-defense" or "home defense" or "hunting", which the courts would be willing to protect, while being armed enough to rebel.

Attached: how do i bring guns into this gun in head.jpg (1080x1256, 192.94K)

>one shot per minute
It was more like 3 or 4 shots a minute
>600+ rounds per minute
No civilian weapon can fire that much that quickly.

>But guns have changed since 1776, the founding fathers didn't imply semi automatic weapons
Okay retard by that logic your free speech doesn't apply to the world wide web.

You can
Most of Canada's violent crime is sorely the responsibility of black people

Nope, because the government changed too. They are FAR more dangerous to us than back in 1797.

They're giving cops laser weapons that erase your dna so you cannot be identified if hit by this weapon

It's OK for cops to murder you with zero possible recourse?

Great ideas Leaf bro, we also need more beards!

A leaf having any say in AMERICAN politics

That's right....The gun laws where originally in place to DEFEND yourself from a corrupt government! That means we should all have access to tanks, drones, missiles and nukes! So STFU moran!

Fuck off leaf.

youtube.com/watch?v=b0vpzpjKVsw Everything behind this guy works, he has the proper license, he's rich as fuck. If you have the money you can own tanks etc. I recommend checking out his YouTube channel too.

So if you have the money, you can own an M1 Abram. Hell dude, even here in Missouri you can own grenade launchers.

Maybe you should start arming your people better, faggot. 5 round blocked magazines are pretty gay.

If you want to talk about an organization that actually defends gun rights (or the actual "ebil gun lobbee"), cite the GOA. The NRA will bend over for your side, no issue, as long as you double your demands, because they'll compromise for half.

OP in pic

Attached: 1583259632099.png (1440x1080, 984.27K)

Is time to ban the fucking leafs from using the internet.

Attached: CC295100-AF2F-4717-805F-94BB38E97BCE.jpg (750x1246, 188.61K)

Attached: Shall not infringe.jpg (720x514, 111.42K)

True, because there is no way to use a nuke to establish a dictatorship over your own people. A nuke is for wrecking, so it's useful in an offensive war. If the dictators use it domestically, they waste their own slaves, factories, farms, etc.

Die of the virus, chink.

>The time for gun law reform in America is now.
Says the dog fucker who thinks canned soup is a luxury.

How about a trade? You can scrape the 2nd amendment and I'll revert women's suffrage.

Man hasn’t changed. Stop making it about the object. The jew wants to disarm you because it knows you’re a threat and will continue to be a threat as long as you still have guns. Jewish arguments always imply that the actor has no responsibility for said actions and it is infact the objects fault. Complete denial of responsibilities. It’s a false equivocation to assume that an object can be the source of the issue when it’s the intent of its use that changes the context, just because the context or a period of time has passed.

Every single slide thread posted on this subject is started by someone who isn’t here for an actual debate. They know why they’re here, they know why you’re here. No one is interested in debating anymore, it’s only a matter of time. You know this especially when you can tell that they cannot even properly argue points without logical fallacies. The only reason why guns are controversial is because of their potential with mens rea. It has nothing to do with past actions or history. It is solely relying on the reader to not think critically about why they don’t want you to be able to defend yourself directly, and if you phrase the question that way, their true angle is revealed.

You should ban murder. Have you tried that? Yeah? Well, put up signs that remind people it's a murder-free country. That also doesn't work? Obvios foggot.

Also, if you actually want to live in a gun-free country, a la Europe (which is gay but does actually work even without guns), then maybe don't import so many COLOREDS and then maybe you'll notice that Canedjins comply with laws a lot more often.

Don't forget about the 13th amendment.

Back then the people had access to the same weapons as the military, laws should reflect that today.

No jew

Based bong.

Yes, restore the 2nd

At the end of the day, reasoning with government control fanatics is not possible.
The answer must be; If you want our guns, you will have to take it from us by force. We will fight back, overthrow your corrupt oligarchy, execute all of you, and implement a better nation.
If you doubt this, then strap up and come at us.

>600 rounds per min

What civilian gun does that? Las Vegas shooter had his gun jam and over heat.

retarded leaf is retarded
the declaration says "That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government" Plus not all police and army men will support a tyrannical government.

What is an x-axis?

You can still own automatics with proper license... an automatic is capable of that.

>80% of Canada's gun violence is from guns that were smuggled over the border from the US

>smuggled over the border from the US

>smuggled

Do I have to explain how retarded you are? These guns are already illegal in your country. You're basically saying 80% of gun violence comes from guns that are already illegal. Banning firearms is much more dangerous than having a well armed populace.

If the founders had armalites they would have had those in mind when they wrote the amendment, your argument is retarded, private citizens had better guns than the colonial army actually.

Also the 600rpm is the number for the automatic M16 you brainlet. Not the AR15.

You keep making the same arguments that are so easily toppled every time, get new material.

Attached: 26A11305-5DC4-4ADD-9D82-35090FC33200.jpg (750x888, 92.79K)

>the declaration says "That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government"
Okay, so how come the dude who shot up the republican baseball game was arrested then?

What would a rebellion using .22 caliber even look like?

What if the law was just:
It's legal to own whatever the standard firearm for a US military infantryman is
like if the government sends grunts to your door to intern you in a camp, you're allowed have whatever they have so it's fair
that way there's no ambiguity

Attached: 7993131123.png (1200x600, 1.24M)

>leaf
Guns have changed and so have the guns of the government
Civilians should be allowed to own mortars, tanks, full-auto heavy machine guns that can be mounted on the back of your truck etc. but un-ironically

Attached: 1E5C7F64-21D0-4EDC-A28D-583724484F42.jpg (500x469, 187.67K)

Sounds like it's time to multiply the amount of ammunition you're allowed to own by 600.

Thomas Jefferson owned a semi automatic air rifle that was in use by some militaries in Europe at the time so this is a lie

Attached: 83C0C266-668E-4FE0-AE56-9775F1B9E853.jpg (705x403, 55.08K)

Guns are not the problem

Everything went to shit when Rea*an closed asylums

nydailynews.com/news/crime/firing-ar-15-horrifying-dangerous-loud-article-1.2673201

Say hello to (((Gersh Kuntzman))), a journalist who has fired the AR-15 one time and was apparently traumatised by doing it.

Attached: Kunzman-1.jpg (234x219, 30.63K)

I agree. Ban gun ownership for nigs and spics and institute stop and search laws for said ethnicities

welp, I'm going to have to start advocating for a maple syrup ban in canada, its contributing to my countries obesity epidemic. So canada should ban maple syrup because people in my country aren't responsible.

That is how fucking crazy you sound.

A massacre.
However, realistically speaking, rebels would not use .22 rifles to revolt. They'd use explosives and stole or illicit assault rifles.

Attached: 75BB1F4D-D7E5-4649-B71F-9C52412C2AE8.png (423x477, 177.81K)

It says arms, not guns. Rapier and cutlass laws need a serious revival in the social zeitgeist as far as I'm comcerned.

Attached: 1584DCC1-A623-4732-B1B7-9A66EB99E6E3.jpg (960x756, 98.09K)

Oh, also
>how come the dude who shot up the republican baseball game was arrested then?
Because he was a terrorist, not a revolutionary.
I will now explain the difference; A terrorist is a man who does a violent action against the government and loses. A revolutionary is one who does so and wins.

>Be leaf
>Too cuck to held a gun
>Better ban it

Try with a more convincing thought, cuck

In those days, you had access to the same kind of weaponry as the military and police. You don't have that access today, the pic is misleading because you can't get full auto, nor can you drive around in an armed tank, nor can you keep icbms in your backyard.

Does this mean we can has grenades now?

Attached: serveimage.jpg (628x552, 144.34K)

We have more guns per person than you, idiot

I was exposed to fire from an AR-15 that left me with a number of severe scars that people frequently ask me about even to this day. While my physical and psychological therapy continue in ongoing efforts at recovery, I don't know if I'll ever regain the man that was lost that day. It's hard to describe the sort of suffering modern weaponry can inflict when brought to grim purpose, and even harder to discuss those old wounds to people that mean well but can never truly relate. I count myself fortunate to have survived and dare not tempt fate with hasty, impassioned tales of woe. I can only tell you what I tell them all:

It felt like a bazooka and sounded like a cannon. The explosions - loud like a bomb - gave me a temporary case of PTSD.

Attached: Kunzman.jpg (480x494, 27.25K)

The grunts coming to intern me in a camp would simply show up in armored vehicles like they did in Waco, Texas.
Which is why everyone needs to remember... DON'T WAIT FOR THEM TO SHOW UP AT YOUR DOOR! YOU WILL LOSE!
Don't let them catch you by surprise, sitting around the dinner table with your wife and children.
Get your friends together, suit up, and kick down the doors of THEIR homes while they sit at the dinner table with THEIR wife and children.
The only way to win once they start interning people in camps is to take the offensive.

this, as usual a foreigner who knows nothing about America or its history or culture or laws tries to make sweeping self righteous statements on something they don’t even know shit about

we had better weapons with more fire power publicly available in 1920. There problem isn't the Guns OP, its flooding our country with dangerous people for decades on end, and the disintegration of social values.

I'm talking about that leaf, not about you.

For the 1 trillionth time, fuck off. I'm keeping what I own and I will build more. Not because I need more guns, but because I like building my own shit in general.

fuck off schlomo all these Multi-Shot guns existed BEFORE the second amendment, so did nade launchers

Attached: 1522367073995.jpg (1320x1112, 372.84K)

I want to watch him shoot a Mannlicher M95