"..Militia being necessary to the security of the state.." If that doesn't say why gun rights are needed, find a better arguement against that specific point.
@9J27G4QPeace and Freedom4mos4MO
The children. And all the Innocent people. It also connects with the abortions of Women now these days. The risk of their "child" getting shot at in school. The access of the younger people on it. Yes an adult, certified, license person bought the gun but that won't matter if someone else got access over it.
@9J27MWY4mos4MO
The 2nd amendment was created almost 300 years ago for the purpose of using arms against the government if and when the need arises. But with modern military might, civilians armed with guns wouldn’t stand a chance against tanks and air strikes.
@9J279RVProgressive4mos4MO
Gun ownership does not equate to militia for the state, and only applies to the people owning guns, not police officers and the military. It has been interpreted to be a person owning a gun, and in many instances of home protection a gun is unnecessary and excessive force in which other methods would have been suitable. Guns help people kill people, and self defense is not a valid argument when the other person is more than likely unarmed or just a person of color being shot for existing.
@9J28KDR4mos4MO
The second amendment was created during a point where citizens needed assault riffles. We don't need the amendment on the level we needed them before.
The historical activity of users engaging with this agreement.
Loading data...
Loading chart...
Loading the political themes of users that engaged with this discussion
Loading data...
