The quote that has sparked many intense debates: "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."

Some people (most likely lefties) interpret the above to mean that the founding fathers thought only militias could own arms. But to me this interpretation is incorrect. I believe what they really meant was that, regular people, aka citizens, should be able to keep arms. Period. And one benefit of the citizenry being armed is that they could form militias to secure the freedom of the nation, should the government turn tyrannical. I think this is what they meant. The founding fathers were NOT saying that the only way a regular citizen could own arms is if he is in a militia. And to be honest, I thought the founding fathers kind of butchered it when they came up with this amendment. It's poorly constructed, I mean, look at how much room we have for debate. They really should have simply said, "the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed" and that would have been that.

Of course, this is just my own subjective interpretation, and people are welcome to disagree with me.

P.s. based on the responses to this topic, I can tell who is a true patriot and who is a flaming lefty, lol.

Flaming Leftys prefer flamethrowers

i eat ass

I was begging for someone to use a Tesla flamethrower on those antifa protests last year. Some dreams dont come true 😢

A right to bear arms, unless you are black. Slaves, free blacks, or other. Black people also weren’t able to become U.S. citizens, even those born within the country.

An argument behind the origin of the second amendment was that it was used as a way to keep the black people suppressed.

What was the purpose of a militia? Washington knew militias were flakey at best and weren’t very reliable when fighting the British. If you look at some of the history behind it militias were used by the state as a way to hunt down and control runaway slaves and a slave uprising.

And you’re right, the amendment was COMPLETELY butchered and left vague to appease the states in the south. It was written vague as a bargaining chip to get the southern states to join the union.

Spoiled shitheads still at it https://mobile.twitter.com/MrAndyNgo/status/1436120591262756869

This is historical revisionism. The founders expressed repeated concerns over the threat posed by a standing army. The militia were seen as a means of maintaining the security of a free state, and as militias rely on regular citizens, those citizens need to be able to keep and bear arms in order to make a "well-regulated militia" feasible. I am honestly perplexed by people who consider the wording confusing.

Andy Ngo deserves a medal. I would have given up years ago with the amount of harassment he gets.




Black people own guns.

This post was edited by EndlessSky on Sep 12 2021 10:22am

That's a lot of stuff to write to be wrong.

Most gun control measures are racist and were written to keep firearms out of the hands of black people. This still exists in North Carolina with pistol purchase permits and other states with overly restrictive measures for obtaining a CCW permit.