Right to Bear Arms

[DJD]

Our "arms" don't mean anything any more, though.

Back when that was written, the average citizen could bear arms that were at least mildly equivalent to what the government had.

Not any more. If the spirit of that amendment were still truly in place we'd all be able to legally have tanks, missiles and bombs.

Thats taking that a bit far don't you think? The fact that I can have firearms in my house or on my person means alot. Look at the countries that don't allow that or had that right taken away. They miss it...the bafoons running their country don't but I would guess alot of the citizens do.

Besides tanks get terrible gas mileage and are hard to get parts for.

[know1]

Thats taking that a bit far don't you think? The fact that I can have firearms in my house or on my person means alot. Look at the countries that don't allow that or had that right taken away. They miss it...the bafoons running their country don't but I would guess alot of the citizens do.

Besides tanks get terrible gas mileage and are hard to get parts for.

It probably is taking it a bit far, but the government's weaponry is just going to keep getting better and better and the weapons that we are allowed to have will stay the same (and sometimes get worse).

[bassiusmaximus]

Being a former police officer I often laugh when the far left started talkin about passing a law to take away our firearms. I mean I wasn't gonna enforce a law like that, and no other officer I knew would either. And the same goes for when I was in the military. So if police and military aren't going to do it then who is. I mean the far left don't have the marbles to go to someone's house and get them. They ever try it and the **it will hit the fan. So they better have their bags packed and have a plane waiting on a runway.
So they are left with trying to take away one thing at a time and hope to get to their end result of no firearms over a long period of time.