Time to revisit the 2nd Amendment

here. you dropped this.

But only to the people within those militias. You shouldn't take things out of context to fit your world view.

Look who's talking

Out of context? Gotcha. You mean like the OP?

It RELIES on regular citizens who own and use guns for use as militia when needed for defense.

Try looking things up.

Talk about out of context. You just put your spin on the second amendment without even quoting it.

Here let me help: 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.

Now what exactly is a militia? A bunch of citizens with muskets? In 1791, yes. But how do we get a well regulated militia if all the citizens are unarmed? Your argument is pathetic.

Just in case you missed it, here is the link for the most recent SCOTUS opinion where they UPHELD the second amendment as we daft lunatics like it.

(Copied from below link)"The Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home."

https://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/07-290.ZS.html

Anything else is just your opinion....

You're on the right track but you might want to look up what "militia" meant back then for even better context.
Unlike now where it is generally taken to indicate a unit, back then the word applied to an individual.
Well regulated then also meant that said individuals were armed on their own and proficient in the use of their arms.

On the other hand, the original purpose is as stated, "A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state." Lacking much of a functioning army and unable to afford building a large one, recruiting citizens on short notice for defense was an obvious concern back then.

Agreed, you can also debate what was meant back then for what "freedom of speech" meant. What "make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof" meant.

But the point is - and the SCOTUS upheld, the 2nd A wording means owning a firearm is unconnected with service in a militia.

But that Supreme Court interpretation is a more recent one, albiet one fitting it as it has expanded and been in effect applied over time.

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof" has since been warped to practically the opposite of how it was intended to be applied, since it was a prohibition against Congress attempting to establish any particular religion on a Federal scale while protecting the right of individual States to estrablish their own if the so chose.

Aye!

"""being necessary to the security of a free state""" Yes some yahoos in Tennessee are going to protect us from a North Korean or Russian or Chinese missile attack.... NOT necessary any longer

"possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia"

Exactly, I, not the gun

Judges get over ruled, keep making a stink on common sense shit and there will be no choice left but to illuminate the second for what it is.... a way to keep the national guard without having to pay for it... those days no longer relevant. Time folks started tweeting their congress people about it...

Stink? Just stating the facts. Written in 1791, upheld in 2008 by the SCOTUS.

Think it cant be done? Why cant you buy a fully automatic weapon. Tired of the gun bullshit... you freaking nutjobs afraid to go buy diapers... maybe you wouldnt be if others could not shoot you because they have no gun....

Now you're talking gun laws. Which I am not against good laws. I am a well regulated 22 yo female with a handgun that I hope to never use.

you're losing your arguments and boring me now.

What does 9/11 have to do with it? oh I know... there were no safety regulations pre 9/11 then we put some in and GUESS WHAT?

The 2nd gives everyone the right. Specific laws are necessary. But never ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever forget, no matter how tired you're tired of hearing it, laws are for people, not the weapon.

that happens, we're screwed

It says nothing about muskets either...

Militia is the people. Quit being so daft.

so simple even you should be able to grasp it

Nope, the bottom photo is military, not militia. How do you think the revolutionary war was won? A bunch of "Hicks" with guns was part of it.

Typical response from the left. "The 2nd amendment was written for men with muskets and the British empire fighting them."

The 2nd amendment was written for them, their children, their grandchildren, etc and did not say anything about muskets. It does mention "bearing arms" which mean guns.

Typical response from the right... never minding we have an Army now and did not then, .... typical asswipe reply is all guns are created equal.... gtfo... a chain gun is not the same as a revolver or an AR is not the same thing as a bolt action rifle..... sooooo tired of your bullshit guns

I hear Africa is nice this time of year.

Plus it is a continent, not a country you stupid *****

No shit, dumbass. I didn't say Africa was a country. Try learning to read before opening that fly trap of yours. And maybe I should have reworded it for the stupid, as you clearly are.

lol.. nice try moron... 90% of African COUNTRIES have fewer gun restrictions than the USA.... maybe if you ever got out of that shithole you live in you might know that.

You're not special because you've been outside the United States, dumbass. Only a pompous dipshit would think traveling outside the country makes you special. You have no idea where I've been. Europe, Japan, and Germany for starters. Not that it's any of you business. But at least I don't brag about it and wear it as some kind of badge of honor like you do.

And I don't have any desire to travel to Africa or any other shithole countries.

[image deleted]