It's Draft Time: Impeachment Edition

[hollodero]

(02-19-2018, 06:16 PM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: Private ships back then had cannons (or at least carronades), and hundreds of pounds of gunpowder. Just sayin'... The gap between what the military used and what private citizens own is actually much larger than it was back then. Back then private citizens owned the same rifles the military used and could purchase the same ship artillery the navy used. Now people own downgraded, modified, civilian-versions of military rifles and no naval cannons.

Yeah that's right. People should probably be allowed to own intercontinental missiles and nukes nowadays.

(02-19-2018, 06:16 PM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: That's of course all based off the wrong idea that the 2nd amendment states that if there's advancements in arms from when it was written, that it wouldn't be allowed.

Yeah I know. It was more of a sarcastic note than a serious one. But I just can't bring myself to believing it's good for a society if everyone can possess semi-automatic rifles and bumping stocks and whatnot to shoot 10.000 bullets a second (I know that number is wrong). For the purposes of self-defense a handgun should do, for the purpose of hunting a deer rifle should do.
Someone in here though was a proud owner of a grenade launcher. Yeah well. But sure, constitution, I get that, and well regulated militia - there's the word "regulated" though. :) A mentally unstable person can't be part of a well regulated militia, same goes for an untrained person, so it's only constitutional to deny them assault rifles unless they get proper training and are checked for mental instability. Isn't it. It probably isn't, but still.