3 ms·

There is plenty of weaponry that is restricted despite the second amendment. The US public gets pretty antsy when smallarms get restricted, but they don't say m

by vacri 11y ago

There is plenty of weaponry that is restricted despite the second amendment. The US public gets pretty antsy when smallarms get restricted, but they don't say much when states start banning civilian-owned things like tanks, landmines, maces, or even brass knuckles. Hell, the US even invaded Iraq for the official reason that 'Iraq had weapons you weren't supposed to have' (chemical weapons). Yes, Iraq is not subject to the US constitution, but the concept of 'some weapons are okay, others are not' is still there.

wtbob 11y ago
> There is plenty of weaponry that is restricted despite the second amendment. The US public gets pretty antsy when smallarms get restricted, but they don't say much when states start banning civilian-owned things like tanks, landmines, maces, or even brass knuckles. Those laws are violations of any honest reading of the Second Amendment (with the possible exception of tanks, if one thinks that the Second Amendment protects only man-portable weapons).