▲ 440 ▼ US Senate Republicans block assault-style weapons ban as mass shootings rise (www.reuters.com) submitted 2 years ago by GiddyGap@lemm.ee to c/politics@lemmy.world 183 comments fedilink hide all child comments
[–] cactusupyourbutt@lemmy.world 8 points 2 years ago (1 child) certainly looks like you would need to protect yourself against a soon-to-be dictatorship though permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Cethin@lemmy.zip 3 points 2 years ago (1 child) Very well could be true, which is part of why I don't mind (and appreciate when done properly) gun ownership. That doesn't change the fact that the wording of the second amendment is for something that isn't true anymore. Again, your rights are (or should be at least) protected by the 9th, which is much more important but most people haven't even heard of. The basis of the 2nd is just not true anymore. It's like saying "physical currency, being necessary for the purchase of items, the right to possess coins shall not be infringed." It doesn't take into account the changes that may occur. We don't need militias to protect the nation anymore, since we have a professional army, and we don't need physical currency anymore, because most people don't use it now anyway. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] MonkeMischief@lemmy.today 2 points 2 years ago Kinda funny actually, since we're starting to see a movement that looks to effectively ban physical currency by making it a headache. Same motivation: surveillance and control. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Cethin@lemmy.zip 3 points 2 years ago (1 child) Very well could be true, which is part of why I don't mind (and appreciate when done properly) gun ownership. That doesn't change the fact that the wording of the second amendment is for something that isn't true anymore. Again, your rights are (or should be at least) protected by the 9th, which is much more important but most people haven't even heard of. The basis of the 2nd is just not true anymore. It's like saying "physical currency, being necessary for the purchase of items, the right to possess coins shall not be infringed." It doesn't take into account the changes that may occur. We don't need militias to protect the nation anymore, since we have a professional army, and we don't need physical currency anymore, because most people don't use it now anyway. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] MonkeMischief@lemmy.today 2 points 2 years ago Kinda funny actually, since we're starting to see a movement that looks to effectively ban physical currency by making it a headache. Same motivation: surveillance and control. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] MonkeMischief@lemmy.today 2 points 2 years ago Kinda funny actually, since we're starting to see a movement that looks to effectively ban physical currency by making it a headache. Same motivation: surveillance and control. permalink fedilink source parent