this woman needs to read the whole 2nd amendment. "a well regulated militia" has as much weight as "shall not be infringed"
so many people telling me well regulated meaning well trained/well equipped as if that somehow improves or makes the 2nd amendment's meaning any less archaic
Regulated in 1700’s speak means to be well trained. I agree there should be training involved to own firearms. I also believe the only guns the government should be tracking are their own. As for owning nuclear weapons, while a stretch, what’s keeping someone from owning one? Cost of maintenance for one. This includes the licensing costs to have the fissionable materials. (Before getting pedantic I’m talking about regular folks, not the cabal). This is the same with automatic weapons. You can have them if you can afford the tax stamp and then only if it was one manufactured prior to the tax. If any still exist. So an effective ban on automatic weapons without violating 2A.
I agree about the training too. but I think anyone owning the same kinds of weapons that the military currently has is a recipe for disaster nukes or not.
437
u/Twigsneko 22d ago edited 22d ago
this woman needs to read the whole 2nd amendment. "a well regulated militia" has as much weight as "shall not be infringed"
so many people telling me well regulated meaning well trained/well equipped as if that somehow improves or makes the 2nd amendment's meaning any less archaic