If we were to rewrite the 2nd amendment in a way that would be impossible to misunderstand, what would that look like?

If we were to rewrite the 2nd amendment in a way that would be impossible to misunderstand, what would that look like?

Here's my attempt:
"Firearms, being necessary for the security of a free state and individual,
the rights and abilities of the people to purchase, manufacture, trade, keep and bear unregistered firearms, firearms accessories and ammunition commensurate with current military technology, shall not be infringed,
interdicted, encroached upon or in any way reduced."

  1. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    It's already impossible to understand.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Misunderstand*?
      Yes, but people are still arguing over the "well regulated" part, "the founding fathers were talking about muskets" etc. My example would not allow for those retarded arguments.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        the fact of the matter is that people don't care whether or not the second amendment is impossible to misunderstand. they don't like guns and will go to any lengths to restrict you inalienable rights to them

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      It already is written that way. this.

      The problem is that the language is old. The meaning of the worlds has evolved over time. You look at what they meant at time of writing. Regulated means properly functions. Bear means to carry around. Militia means anyone capable of military service which today includes pretty much everyone that isn't a child.

      So written with modern language it would be something like that
      >A properly functioning population being necessary for the security of a free state, the right of the people to have and carry around guns will not be restricted.

      The intent based on the peripheral writings of the day also make it very clear that the intent is that any individual should have access to the same weapons as a basic infantryman.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >militia means population, like totally, it’s old english.
        fucking dishonest retard.

  2. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Nobody in power "misunderstands" it, they actively defy it. There is no rule or law so we'll crafted or so cleverly phrased that it cannot just be "ignored" if there's no consequences for ignoring it.

    Every law, and every right, is a threat of violence. Every single one carries the subtext "or you will be killed". The second the real, constant, physical threat disappears, the law or right becomes fiction.
    Violent force is the authority from which all legal authority derives.

  3. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    the second amendment could literally say "the unrestricted right of the people to keep and bear any kind of weapon and accessory ever devised shall not be infringed upon by under any circumstance" and it would still have us in exactly the same predicament we're currently in.
    It's not the amendment that's the isue

  4. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >Changes the definition of Infringed
    >Changes the definition of Firearms
    >Changes the definition of Individual
    The sky is the limit when you don't give a shit and there's no one to stop you.

  5. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I mean the shitlibs aren't playing around anymore so it's funny to even still have arguments like this

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      We need to fill 80 million graves to fix this country.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        It’s gonna take a lot fucking more than that

  6. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Let's rewrite the second amendment right now. One word at a time. I'll start.
    >Shall

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      > Shan‘t

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >Shart

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >shins

  7. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    No, it's perfect. It isn't about firearms it's about all implements of violence. Every last one, from a pointy stick to an anti-air missile.

  8. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Congress and state governments shall make no laws that restrict the type or features of arms and weaponry available to the public under penalty of treason.

  9. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    All guns and armaments are legal for all people at times. No exceptions.

  10. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    How about,
    >you tread you're dead
    Simple as.

  11. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    > Their swords, and every other terrible implement of the soldier, are the birth-right of an American…. [The] unlimited power of the sword is not in the hands of either the federal or state governments, but, where I trust in God it will ever remain, in the hands of the people.
    >
    > — Tench Coxe, Pennsylvania Gazette, February 20, 1788

    Based.

  12. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >Firearms
    Lost me. This doesn't include bladed weapons or lasers.

  13. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Ahem
    >the right for citizens to possess, transport, carry and bear arms cannot be infringed. No law, action, enforcement or rule or any other term can be taken by government to restrict in any way this right.

  14. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I recommend drawing inspiration from this free software license
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WTFPL?useskin=vector#Version_2

  15. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Me want gun, me get gun, you get in way, me kill you.

  16. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Ahem
    > owning firearms and all other weapons (mobile or not) are the God given right to only white people. Infringement upon this God given right hereby allows white people to murder any of you glowmoron garden gnomes in any shape or form

  17. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    "The right of all people regardless of age, sex, nationality and/or felon status to freely keep, carry, transport, trade, and transfer weapons of any sort and of current, past or future military or civilian design, as well as all of their ammunition, parts, production tools, accessories, and any other implements whether or not they are essential to the function of said weapons, and to use said weapons and implements for any lawful purposes including but not limited to self-defense, shall not be infringed, limited as to quantity or quality, restricted, prohibited, regulated, reduced or subject to any form of tax, fee, permit, license or requirements."

  18. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Pointless conversation, it does it's job and it will never be rewritten because it keeps everyone fighting.

  19. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Just remove the well regulated militia part, and add the words "any form" before arms
    >simple as...

    >the 1st two lines of the 2nd amendment is the founding fathers reasoning behind adding it as one of the 1st few amendments of civil rights and liberties.
    Anyone with actual reading comprehension can tell that the right outlined begins when it says "the right of the people" and is the only part that matters in the debate.
    Also by definition "shall not be infringed" means that any and all forms of the aforementioned shall not be kept from being possessed by the people.

    >Notice specifically, that they used the word ARMS, not specifically Firearms.
    This means that they were referring to any ARMARMENT human beings could posses past/present/future.
    They did this in order to protect the right well into the future knowing their would be advancements in technology and the people would need to possess them to protect from tyranny.
    If we trace back past history, commoners and the public well up until the civil war were able to possess any and all weaponry currently equivalent or even advanced beyond the government without restriction or oversight.

    >As a patriotic american citizen, interpreting the will of our founding fathers as they intended, I say we should have the ability to own/make our own arm-able nuclear warheads in our garages if we desire...
    For we live under a oppressive/lording government that refuses to call across the spectrum protesting for ensuring the nations election security to relieve the worries of the american people on January 6 2020, as anything other than a political insurrection or possible political coupe.

    When the process and rules are change amid an election, there is viable reasoning that dirty work/corruption is at foot. Thus the people's worries and concerns are warranted and should hold their leaders accountable.
    Especially, when their leaders fear said publics call to action and the leaders work behind closed doors under military guard.

  20. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >”Being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep bear arms shall not be infringed. Yes, the arms of bears. All bears. Black bears, brown bears, white bears, fuck it, even pandas. If it’s a bear and has arms, people have the right to have them, be them still attached to a living bear or a dead bear, or seperated from the bear in any way possible. See the attached list in the following appendix for what qualifies as a bear.”
    I hope it’s clarified now.

  21. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >ere's my attempt:
    >"Firearms, being necessary for the security of a free state and individual,
    >the rights and abilities of the people to purchase, manufacture, trade, keep and bear unregistered firearms, firearms accessories and ammunition commensurate with current military technology, shall not be infringed,
    >interdicted, encroached upon or in any way reduced."
    Hello my name is muhammed, I just got off the plane from Afghanistan do you have any nuclear devices for sale

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *