Can you tell me specifically what the second amendment guarantees?

>>135361818
Learn to read.
You can have arms, and that won't change is what it says.

File: PepeLatte.png (964KB, 768x768px) Image search: [Google]

964KB, 768x768px

>>135361818
it guarantees attorneys will have jobs forever ever

Shut your shit. You're not taking our guns

>>135362051
>You can have arms, and that won't change is what it says.

Which arms? As I said, some states are very restrictive. You can't buy certain guns in these states. Some states ban certain types of guns, while others don't.

I'm confused. Just tell me exactly what the second amendment guarantees. What "shall not be infringed"?

>>135362376
>What "shall not be infringed"?
That's the thing. They've slowly wormed their way into infringing.
Theoretically none of it should have been put in place to begin with, nobody really put their foot down and stopped it though so it keeps creeping.

It means you can go to a shooting range with this fancy toy. Thats about it.
America has been neutered.
The only violence and 2nd amendment activation is from the left. Scalise is a prime example. The right is a bunch of pussies that keeps telling themselves to obey the laws and everything will work out just fine!
The 2nd amendment will never be used for what it was written for: to defend ones state against a tyrannical federal govt.
Honestly, how much more tyranny does this country need before someone uses it?
>civil forfeiture
>unlawful surveillance
>parallel consturction
>voter fraud
>mandates for private products (health insurance)
How much more shit will the good people of /pol/ take?

>>135361818

The 2nd Amendment hasn't been fully incorporated via the 14th Amendment, therefore, states may be more restrictive than the federal government in restricting access to certain types of firearms/ammo/accessories and so forth. They may also regulate them via licensing for ownership and carrying and restrict how they might be carried and in what manner and for what purpose they may be used.

However the Supreme Court in DC v. Heller reaffirmed an individual right to keep and bear arms irrespective of an individual's connection with an organized militia that no state can infringe upon.

This confusion is the price we pay to have a federal system of government.

File: The BEST explained.jpg (1MB, 3012x1728px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 3012x1728px

>>135361818

Exactly what it says on the tin. Gun control legislation is unconstitutional.

File: Fun control is wrong.jpg (426KB, 750x1050px) Image search: [Google]

426KB, 750x1050px

>>135364078

Bonus round. Also, one could easily argue that as a member of the militia as per the Militia Act and the 14th Amendment, it's not only your right, but your duty to own a gun and know how to properly use and care for it.

>Could they
From our cold dead hands

>Would they
If they thought they could get away with it

File: Funs for the world.gif (380KB, 1500x2700px) Image search: [Google]

380KB, 1500x2700px

>>135364231

I knew I had at least one more somewhere.