The second amendment says [quote]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.[/quote] That clearly means that the authors believed that people who bear arms ought be in their respective militias, not owning automatic weapons for no good reason.
Overall, I'm okay with people who've passed background checks owning some weapons (something like up to 5, though proper justification could sway me to a higher number), but I simply cannot justify anybody owning an AK-47 if they're not in the military. I guess SWAT officers and private security firms might use assault weapons as well, but I feel like in both cases, the heavy weapons don't need to be owned by individuals.
Your role as a moderator enables you immediately ban this user from messaging (bypassing the report queue) if you select a punishment.
7 Day Ban
7 Day Ban
30 Day Ban
Permanent Ban
This site uses cookies to provide you with the best possible user experience. By clicking 'Accept', you agree to the policies documented at Cookie Policy and Privacy Policy.
Accept
This site uses cookies to provide you with the best possible user experience. By continuing to use this site, you agree to the policies documented at Cookie Policy and Privacy Policy.
close
Our policies have recently changed. By clicking 'Accept', you agree to the updated policies documented at Cookie Policy and Privacy Policy.
Accept
Our policies have recently changed. By continuing to use this site, you agree to the updated policies documented at Cookie Policy and Privacy Policy.