| Home | RSS Feeds |
| Funny Pictures | Funny Videos |
| Funny GIFs | YouTube Videos |
| Text/Links | Comic Editor |
| User Rankings | Channels |
| Copyright Removal Request | |
| |
It's a definition of what you would consider personal liberties
1. Freedom of speech, press, religion etc. Speech means you are allowed to openly criticize and speak out without punishment. The right to worship and practice your religion freely without persecution. Press that is allowed to report news and information to the public without government censorship. There is some of that, but it's not like North Korea
2. The right to bear arms, means the right to have and hold a weapon to defend yourself
3. The government respecting your privacy. Meaning wire tappings and the NSA are illegal
Those types of things
1. Freedom of speech, press, religion etc. Speech means you are allowed to openly criticize and speak out without punishment. The right to worship and practice your religion freely without persecution. Press that is allowed to report news and information to the public without government censorship. There is some of that, but it's not like North Korea
2. The right to bear arms, means the right to have and hold a weapon to defend yourself
3. The government respecting your privacy. Meaning wire tappings and the NSA are illegal
Those types of things
When the colonist fought the British in the Revolution one of the first things the British wanted to do was take away their weapons so the Americans didn't have a means to defend themselves. Guns are a way of protecting the people from the government.
In the 20th century alone 280-300 million people were killed by their own governments. Sure you can argue that the US isn't like Stalinist Russia, North Korea or Saddam's Iraq, but the principle of the matter still remains. The people must have a right to defend themselves.
Perhaps if you took the time to actually evaluate the counter argument to your pre-conceptive bias you would understand that
In the 20th century alone 280-300 million people were killed by their own governments. Sure you can argue that the US isn't like Stalinist Russia, North Korea or Saddam's Iraq, but the principle of the matter still remains. The people must have a right to defend themselves.
Perhaps if you took the time to actually evaluate the counter argument to your pre-conceptive bias you would understand that
Probably wasting my time since you're an anon, but your argument is completely fucking retarded.
You don't think they wouldn't know that guns evolve over time? I agree that muskets don't have a place in the modern world. Hand guns aren't so bad, but why do you feel the need to punish the tens-hundreds of millions of gun owners because of a group of people that make up less than .01% of the country?
You don't think they wouldn't know that guns evolve over time? I agree that muskets don't have a place in the modern world. Hand guns aren't so bad, but why do you feel the need to punish the tens-hundreds of millions of gun owners because of a group of people that make up less than .01% of the country?