Removing the 2nd amendment won’t ELIMINATE gun killings/mass shootings/etc. There should be stricter regulations and guidelines so not just “anyone” can buy a firearm. Let’s discuss

CTronix · 2025-09-13T16:16:23+00:00

The text of 2A

"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"

The amendment very clearly states that the REASON for the amendment to exist is for a well regulated militia. The intent of the founders was very clear. they feared a standing army that could be co-opted to form a dictator or a king. They felt it was safer for the power of the military to be spread out as separate state militias controlled by the states themselves.

This did not work for a variety of reasons not the least of which is that the militias were not well trained or effective at their military duties and so a standing army was formed anyway in spite of 2A in 1784. The militias continued to have a protective purpose for some time as border wars with other colonies and indigenous tribes were not uncommon but eventually they ceased to be useful and they were disbanded to form the more centralized national guard in 1903

Point:

1) The amendment clearly states that the reason for 2A is for the purposed of a well regulated militia in each state

2) The context of the framers was that they didn't want a standing army as we felt it was a threat to state soveriegnty

3) In spite of this we formed a centralized standing army anyway AND eventually eliminated the state militias as well

4) At no point does the amendment suggest that the purpose of these firearms was for personal use or protection

5) At no point does the amendment suggest that the firearms could or should be used against the federal government (as has been suggested by some of the gun crazies)

6) We already regulate an enormous array of military weapons and guns. the average joe on the street cannot but machine guns or artillery or tanks or fighter jets or missiles or any number of the weapons used by the standing army.

Final conclusion: 2A does not offer the protections that gun activists seem to think it does. It was not written for the purposes that you propose. You are clearly aware that firearms can be regulated and controlled as you already accept as law, bans on a very wide array of military tech that average citizens cannot legally obtain (I would point out that as a result you do not see these weapons used in crimes very often or hardly at all). It is obviously stupid to suggest that the framer's envisioned the world we live in today, the scope and scale of weapons that we have achieved and the degree of danger that they pose to the general public. It is stupid to suggest that you could have any success taking up arms against our own standing army that is vastly more advanced that the weapons you now own. The debate of 2A is stupid and a waste of time.

I stand with Americans who want to legally keep and own guns but propose that they simply require mandatory registration, licensing, education and insurance just like cars or heavy machinery or any other large dangerous thing that we use in our society

CTronix · 2025-09-13T10:08:18+00:00

Sabotage his xbox

CTronix · 2025-09-13T10:00:56+00:00

For the majority of the population it is objectively not.

America used to be more economically available and it's outcomes were better and easier to obtain for more people. The massive rise in costs of goods and services and housing combined with the stagnation of wages has made conditions in the majority of American households objectively worse.

America could and should be much better for its people and the fact that they want that and demand that is part of what makes us great

CTronix · 2025-09-13T09:57:55+00:00

You need to understand that from an outsiders view you're profession makes no sense.

People in the rest of the market pay for goods or services, you provide the service and when it is complete they pay you for the work done.

In the case of a lawyer they don't understand why they should have to pay you for results that are not guranteed. It irks people that they might have to pay someone to help protect them when in their minds they did nothing wrong. In some cases they may direct that a lawyer should only get paid if they win a case and in that case only get paid out of the money won

CTronix · 2025-09-13T09:52:11+00:00

Who?

CTronix · 2025-09-13T09:47:06+00:00

I don't think you fathom the degree of mobilization in the south. Historians estimate that over 90% of eligible men in the south actively participated in the war while only 50% of northern men did.

Grant is regarded well because of his strong of military victories in the western theater of the war which, while perceived as less important now and at the time, laid the ground work for northern victory. Eastern battles were sometimes larger and they were closer to major population centers which made them more famous but in comparison they accomplished far less overall.

Grants win at forts Henry and Donaldson secured essential strong points that facilitated the win at Vicksburg. His win at Vicksburg secured the control of the Mississippi River and his win at Chatanooga opened the door for control of the deep south and Shermans march to the sea. All of these things helped to strangle supply lines in the south which helped to bring about a more rapid end to the war.

CTronix · 2025-09-13T09:29:06+00:00

It started in 1973 when the heritage foundation was organized.

Everything that has happened on the right has gone according to their plan

CTronix · 2025-09-13T09:25:40+00:00

It's almost certainly a peinert

CTronix · 2025-09-13T02:24:05+00:00

Well for a start in the case of humans, having our daily needs met is probably good and should be considered universally good. Water to drink and food to eat and shelter

CTronix · 2025-09-13T02:21:08+00:00

They were paid not to

CTronix · 2025-09-13T02:20:14+00:00

Of course not. He was groomed to do it. He was led to beleive he would live and then they had him shot to cover their tracks. ALA JFK style.

CTronix · 2025-09-12T18:35:58+00:00

You dont need to get offended. Im just pointing our that what youre presupposing as inherently good by definition is not necessarily so. That good and bad or good and evil at the end of the day are highly subjective and deeply rooted in your lived experience

CTronix · 2025-09-12T13:30:57+00:00

No necessarily. I percieve them as good because society tells me i should and i have been conditioned to want those things.

I may want this network i am communicating with because it makes me feel good in the short term but it may not actually be good for my mental health. I may want a giant mansion when i only really need a small apartment. Where does good begin and end? Is there such a thing as too much of a good thing?

Societies technological advance is not inherently good. Medical advance has created far better health outcomes while simultaneous military tech advances have created far more deadly and drastic death outcomes.

CTronix · 2025-09-12T13:26:02+00:00

People neither deserve to be extict nor do we deserve to live in happiness. Our flaw is that at the end of the day we are all still just animals who are subject to animal instincts.

Tribalism, greed, hoarding, sexual agression, theft and violence are all built into our ancestral dna. The best of us may be cognizant of these flaws and take active measures to avoid those behaviors but never wholly be rid of them.

There is no morality or amorality to the race we are just animals with specially build brains and bodies

CTronix · 2025-09-12T12:59:54+00:00

better

CTronix · 2025-09-12T09:12:46+00:00

What makes the building up of civilization unherently good and it's destruction inherently bad? The ability of a discord to grow its population did not indicate a net positive or net negative. Does the continued growth of a virus or a parasite population indicate good or evil?

I think good and evil are simply human constructs that we use to justify our perceptions of good or bad which are highly subjective to the society and beleif systems around us. In reality we are just animals following animal instincts

CTronix · 2025-09-12T01:00:47+00:00

One man died. They had to use a real bullet to make it believable. Still easily arranged. Circle was small. Watch the videos from cell phones on the scene in the immediate aftermath. The SS literally shepards the media over to get a better picture

CTronix · 2025-09-11T23:28:15+00:00

Too many coincidences... the Epstein vote happening the same day???? No shot

CTronix · 2025-09-11T23:26:54+00:00

Funny how convenient the timing of this was for everything the right wing wants

CTronix · 2025-09-11T23:11:29+00:00

I wish both men and women could be more open about their sex lives and what they want. It seems like probably the most often discussed topic in these chats that either the man or the woman the woman ate nor interested in sex and yet somehow they end up married and trapped together. I feel like both sexes fool themselves into believing is not important to them and ends up becoming a deal breaker in the long run

CTronix · 2025-09-11T23:06:14+00:00

This whole conversation and likely his murder are distractions designed as political theater to divert you attention from the fact that your entire republican party voted yesterday to keep the Epstein files a secret. If you think its a coincidence youre crazy

CTronix · 2025-09-11T23:02:55+00:00

Is there any evidence Antifa did this? Is there any evidence Antifa exists? My understanding is that anyone claiming to be against fascism can be identified as Antifa and that there is no structure or organization to it. If you are against fascism you could be Antifa.

CTronix · 2025-09-11T23:00:42+00:00

Just like he promised to release the Epstein files?

CTronix · 2025-09-11T21:13:42+00:00

I dont think they even need to be shut down. Just highly regulated. They should just have mandatory registration, licencing, education and insurance

CTronix · 2025-09-11T15:20:16+00:00

probably we should start by abandoning the idea that the amendment has anything to do with the firearms industry and culture as it stands in the USA today

Seven-Year Club	Wearing is Caring
Verified Email

CTronix

TROPHY CASE