omg omg omg out divine leader has commented on our thread once again! omg omg OMG OMG! ALL HAIL TOBI!
“The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed” Bear arms got ? Hold arms? ok? Got it? Do i need to say it any slower?
that is the wording of the second amendment. What they mean’t by that is the people can keep arms got
yes but they’re still legal as its your right to bare arms .
[quote=“SirWarriant, post:1607, topic:21032”]
“The right to keep and bare arms” Bare arms meaning you’re holding the arms k? Got it? Thats the wording of the second amendment.
[/quote] its means god damn armaments .
yes please it might help your god damn stupidity to grasp the concept of shortening a word
lets just leave it at if anyone invaded the us they would be in for a nasty surprise, wether or not they won.
They mean’t weapons that you can hold in your arms they didn’t have tanks and jets back then good lord.
To be fair, those are mostly suicides. I strongly believe in one’s right to end their own life. Also, these people would kill themselves notwithstanding the tool. I hope we will have euthanasia like Switzerland when I need it. If we don’t, then I will shoot myself. If that won’t be an option, then I guess some people will have pretty fucked day with their trains delayed.
To be fair there is no constitutional right to drink nor drive. Please don’t mix those. There were real reasons behind the 2A, whether you agree with them or not.
I have life to tend to so I won’t read the other 30 new comments. Please let me know if there is anything you consider worth my attention 
Yeah they had just finished sending the Brits back across the pound with their tails between their legs. They wanted a system in place for the people to defend themselves and for the people to take out a corrupt government if necessary.
@TheDivineInfidel I invite you to read this article. The main problem Czech resistance in WW2 was facing was actually lack of firearms. They spent as much time and energy on getting guns as they did on harming the Nazis. They could have been much more effective if the Czech weren’t disarmed in the early stages of occupation.
Some of the 360.000 Czech people murdered by the Germans may have lived. Or may have died fighting and take several dozen thousands Nazis to their graves with them.
1 Like
If only there were cameras on every street in cities back then. It could have prevented the holocaust.
the finnish were far superior to any of the other filthy peasant countries in Europe during world war 2, they stood up the the might of the red army with half their numbers and not even the firepower, they used fucking crowbars to take out tanks and it was the birth of the legend simo hiya!
but they had cannons !! jesus christ the definition of armaments has never changed
eapons (of war), weaponry, firearms, guns, ordnance, cannon, artillery, armaments, munitions, instruments of war, war machines, military supplies, materiel
"arms and ammunition"
i cant explain anymore , you’re either thick or trolling i hope the latter
nvm gotta go tololololololol
why does that sentence concern me 
im certainly on your side in that debate
[quote=“snejdarek, post:1620, topic:21032”]
I have life to tend to so I won’t read the other 30 new comments. Please let me know if there is anything you consider worth my attention
[/quote] @SirWarriant not knowing that arms is short for armaments is great one
Arms is also short for fire arms which refers to a gun you hold… It says in your own link.
Im done trying to explain this too you.
arms stands for armaments the definition of armaments is weaponry, firearms, guns, ordnance, cannon, artillery, every single one from a pistol to a fucking 205mm artillery gun that is the legal definition . i cant put it any simpler .
Usually refers to a hand held gun. At the time they had muskets pistols and cannons. You know what they damn well meant by that. If you have an issue with the wording take it up with them.
Just to make sure there is no misunderstanding.
The CC license includes license to own and possess. Unlike in US, you can’t have gun at home without license. So yes, CC is in a way easier than in many parts of US, but at the same time imagine that the general access to firearms in US would be on the level of CC.
Also, all guns are registered, and you can sell them only to another licensed person. Then, he has 10 days to register the sale with police (even among private persons). So there is no “straw purchase” possibility. A thug can’t use a licensed person to get to firearms.
This also leads to another thing. Even if thieves hit a house with guns (when no-one is home), they are likely to take TV and leave guns alone. They know cops don’t have enough resources to track all TVs, but they will put all resources in tracking gun thieves.
One thing that is easier than US is full auto. These are on may issue permit. Quite hard to get, but still, as far as I understand all post-1986 full autos are completely banned in US for private owners.
Should you have any questions regarding gun laws in my country, don’t hesitate to ask.
yes well down it includes hand held weapons it also includes cannons and artillery
which is why he was allowed to own a 40mm gun under the second amendment be it a little harder to get hold of .
right now you’re arguing with the english language
Well private ownership of canons was possible in US at the time of drafting of 2A. If someone points out to tanks and jets, in my opinion, they are harming their case exactly because of citizens owned canons in 18 and 19 century US.