Well said!

"Drugs" should include caffeine, nicotine, and alcohol.

Why, you ask?

Because

SHALL

uh huh

Not really, niggers dont buy guns from the gun store. They buy them on a street corner in a brown paper bag.

Hey, the US constitution forbids the US government from banning drugs or any other good, but we've ignored the constitution there.
We've ignored the constitution and have banned full-auto weapons.
We've ignored the constitution and allowed stop-and-frisk and other searches without warrants.
Why stop there?

This, madatory drugs screens at the voting booth, and you got a deal

No it doesn't. The supreme court has ruled time and again that there are public safety exemptions.

The government can secure common goods, such as operation of the post office.

The executive branch can control commerce that can leak into other states, they can also assist in the common good. The ATF has administrative powers, so they can classify weapons. the DEA has regulatory laws that can ban drugs.

Take ONE constitution class in college, just ONE.

>equating a constitutional right to gib me dats

You have to fill out a form that says you're not addicted to any drugs. Welfare isn't a right.

Fuck off, Joseph Smith.

WELFARE IS NOT A CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT

D O N ' T T R E A D O N M E
O
N
'
T

T
R
E
A
D

O
N

M
E

Can someone explain to me why liberals seem to think gun users are all knuckle dragging cavemen that fuck their sisters?

>English class this week
>Professor hands out a short essay written by the most ass-blasted libtard I have ever seen
>Some horseshit about "the day I realized guns don't kill people, PEOPLE kill people"
>Some extremely smug as fuck essay the author was no doubt masturbating to as he wrote it
>blah blah blah "and as the bear charged me, I didn't know what to do... and then it hit me! I had a GUN! I could FIRE this GUN! And then I did"
>"Sure enough, I killed the bear! Sure I had to fire the gun to do it, but the gun didn't kill the bear, IIIIIIIIIIIII did!"
>The next day
>Talking about how Texas just allowed students and teachers to conceal carry in school now
>Don't ask me why we were talking about that in an English class because I don't fucking know either
>Hands us another essay, I take it back, this one is even more ass-blasted
>Some fake syllabus proposed by a butthurt libtard
>"Your grades will be based on the following: 10% - You showed up, 15% - You have a gun, 10% - You turned in your homework, 15% - Shooting behind cover" etc etc
>Try to explain that I own guns that I have never shot at people with, I use them for home defense
>Classroom full of tumblrites starts mocking me and calling me Cletus
>Start cracking jokes asking me if I'm going to go fight the evil Mexicans or some shit
>Stand up for myself and say no, but I'll use it to turn Tyrone into brain salad the next time he wanders into my yard in the middle of the night again
>One girl actually starts crying and asks for me to get kicked out

It reminds me of that horse-faced tranny who tried to claim she could unholster some guy's gun and empty the clip before he noticed. What in the fuck is liberals' obsession with ridiculous shootouts?

>mfw the whole time

>drug test for guns
>no drug test for welfare

SEEMS LEGIT OP

NOT

WELL REGULATED

You actually have to fill out a form saying that you do not do drugs when you buy a gun. You can lie I guess but drug testing every gun purchase would be completely infeasible.

On the bright side, when you hear that they were killed or raped, you can simply laugh at them.
So glad my "english" class is about East Asian culture, Humanities is fun when all you're talking about is the Art of War.

were welfare, food stamps, and unemployment benefits recently added to the bill of rights without me noticing?

THE

RIGHTS

OF

THE

PEOPLE

TO

KEEP

AND

BEAR

ARMS

,

SHALL

NOT

BE

INFRINGED

.

/thread

Food stamps are not a civil right guaranteed you by the Constitution.

Welfare is not a civil right guaranteed you by the Constitution.

Unemployment is not a civil right guaranteed you by the Constitution.

They are merely benefits that are granted you as a privilege, and allotted on the basis of qualifications. These alloted privileges are not Civil Rights that are guaranteed to everyone, while owning and carrying a firearm IS.

Guaranteed.

I dont have any problem with this, and it has nothing to do with the fact that i don't use drugs

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State

W E L L R E G U L A T E D

The key detail I got from your post is that you are under 18 and not allowed here.

Regulated means maintained in the context, you fucking retard

Holy fuck that's one of the most retarded things I've ever read, and for numerous reasons.

Is welfare a constitutional right now? Is there some epidemic that I don't know about with legal gun owners using their firearms to acquire drugs?

Also, however, asking for food stamp recipients to get drug tested is also retarded. I can't even imagine the fucking tax burden that would introduce to everyone.

>gun sales drop 2%
>welfare drops 60%

I'm willing to take a drug screening test to buy a gun if we also make drug screening tests mandatory to receive welfare (once per month).

I'm 25 and in a med school program, dipshit

Gen ed is still a requirement

shall not be infringed

I agree but only illegal drugs

Also anyone who fails that test should have their asses locked away or preferably have their drug riddled brains removed Duerte style

Fuck addicts and dealers. I'm fucking glad that they're now overdosing on fentanyl. Natural selection

This too

Actually drug testing voters isn't a bad thing

Getting free shit at someone else's expense isn't a constitutional right nor a right in the first place.

A right involves being able to acquire property, live life in your own means, and the right to protect one's own life, so long as you do not interfere with anyone else's rights. Everyone has the right to life so long as it doesn't violate anyone else's rights.

Purchasing a gun does not interfere with anyone's rights. It does not affect anyone unless they go out to shoot someone else so that maybe one person to a few dozen are affected.

Welfare, food stamps, etc. are funded by tax dollars which, for all technical purposes violate another person's rights. These are not rights. They are mere privileges that have been voted for by either, a majority of tax payers in a referendum (50.0001% passes as majority), or by elected officials (if there are n-officials, if n is even, there are n/2+1 voters, else, there is ceiling (n/2) voters).

Taxes would have been paid anyways and affect everyone in a country regardless of recipient of benefits or taxpayer.

Two halves of the same sentence talking about two different things, bub.

The militia = the people.

WE THE PEOPLE

That's... Actually not a bad idea.

Who wants a meth head carrying a gun.

Yeah but they didn't know about Muslims niggers were slaves and they never anticipated either to become citizens of the US

Personally you guys should add another amendment saying "no muzrat or nigger may be a citizen of the United States or its allies"

All government restrictions on drug use are both unconstitutional and immoral. Drug use is degenerate, yes, but it is absolutely none of the government's fucking business.

>inb4 the nanny state cuckservatives whine that big daddy government should legislate morality because they're socially-stunted and have never been offered drugs/sex

Tbh there needs to be more drug tests.

Getting a job? Hair test.

Buying a gun? Hair test.

Voting? Hair test.

Welfare? Hair test.

I have no problem taking a drug test of any kind, because I know I'm clean. And none of that cheap ass piss testing. I want hair follicle testing for that sweet historical data.

Regulated has a different meaning. People were guaranteed the right to bear arms with no restrictions so that they could participate in Militias. These in the views of the founders, if one were to read about Jefferson or others, was necessary to keep a tyrannical government from maintaining power and to keep a tyrannical invader from maintaining their occupation.

/thread

Okay, I like this rule.
Less niggers with guns, definitely.

Ok, no id, no vote.

>the rights of the people
>P E O P L E
niggers and drug addicts are not PEOPLE

This is correct though drug users shouldnt have guns or collect welfare, they are fucking scum

Citizenship for everyone in the world is not a right guaranteed by the constitution

And it should never have been given to Mudslimes or niggers

We are being slid with incoherent one-posts because Hillary's documents were released.
They are here:
Sage and hide. Are you doing your part?

Welfare is literally not. There is no explicit provision of monetary welfare or otherwise as a right in the Bill of Rights.

>The supreme court has ruled time and again that there are public safety exemptions.
The US constitution has no provisos though.
When the Supreme Court makes an exception they do so in violation of the Constitution.

Same with people who drink alcohol or coffee.
Such drug usage combined with the possession of a firearm is dangerous to society in the same way that felons are a danger to society.

We need to start treating drug dealers and addicts like the Philippines does

I came here to post this. I've filled that puppy out three times, any lib that tells you it's easy to buy a firearms is talking out of their ass.

>A wide range of Felonies ("could have" is the operative phrase)
>DA&B
>Dishonorable Discharge
>Work Visa
>Ever not American once American
>"Mentally Defective"
>Current restraining order

Any of these prevents a purchase. Some reporter named (((Stienberg))) accused a store of refusing a sale because he's a journalist (running an anti-gun segment). He had a prior DA&B. He wailed that the same standard surely isn't held nationwide.

It is. If you hate guns, slap around someone you love. We'll keep them out of reach.

Straight edge pussy btfo

Don't forget everyone on medication, or people who take Tylenol.

Which amendment guarantees the right to get free shit from the government?

>Three

Kek.

Including sellers and addicts to alcohol and caffeine.

People who drink alcohol exhibit poor decision making skills.
People who use caffeine might become agitated or paranoid.
Can't risk these dangerous people having firearms right.
SCOTUS has already violated the BOR and decided to ban felons from possession, as well as the mentally ill. Well caffeine and alcohol intoxication are mental illnesses.

We must control guns like we control drugs, despite the Constitution absolutely prohibiting the government from banning any goods.

Seems like a good idea to me senpai

The following is a summation of politics. Man is born with potential. The government shouldn't dictate to groups what to do. A strong (yes even nationalist) state. Anti free trade and anti globalism. Sceptical of large influences. Seem familiar? It shouldn't. Because these are social democratic or leftist things. Punching zionism in the hairy vagina. Then you've got the right which is all "whose dick is biggest!?" and how to be a controlling asshole liar. Put refugees. Put debt. Blame unions. Sound like a boomer. And cry about brownies. Fucking children. The left is bright. It has balls. All the right cares about is paying for banks and lying about hospital taxes. Blowing up shit. And wanting always to revert to Adam and Eve. Are we supposed to be making ideas and moving forward? Or are we supposed to be talking about Tyreese for 6 months. Muh echo chamber muh frogger in the box. Complains about black people. Wants 300 million rifles. Moni is fake. Things like constitutions don't matter in common law. And things just get worse and worse. We each have rigged one party states and the number one rule in politics is. Oops. Too leftist? Too much freedom? Mmbuhbye

In states that give concealed carry permits there's usually a requirement that you not be intoxicated. That shit will land you in jail pretty quick.

Great idea, drugs are degenerate and anyone who uses them is not to be trusted

T?hem too.
Pain relievers can affect muscle control and endanger the lives of others when guns are involved.
Public safety trumps civil rights. That's why we banned full-autos, short-barrels, and felons and the mentally ill.
These rules must be expanded. The BOR does not matter here anymore since banning full-autos, short-barrels, and felons all violates the second amendment which HAS NO EXCEPTIONS AT ALL.

????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

Wat

How is that not infringement?

What happened to the family photo? I saw an SKS in the thumbnail, that looked nice.

You deleted though, so I think you're bullshitting.

Anyway, 50 min, no word from OP, think about it.

>tfw obscure words

Fully automatic weapons are perfectly legal.

>Nugget
>Hi-Power (?)
>AR Mags
>No AR in sight

True /k/ommando, right here.

Niggers don't buy guns legally, however.

In the terms of the Framers, "Well Regulated" meant that they were equipped with well maintained, accurate, and somewhat uniform weapons.

Insulin? Check.
BP meds? Check.
Sugar pills? Check.
Natural drugs produced by your body? Check.
Only inanimate objects are allowed to purchase guns. No exceptions.

>welfare is a right

>drug dealers should be shot on site like in the Philippines...then see how the crime rates fall.

Gun rights in the USA have been steadily infringed upon for decades

There's a good image representing it as a cake (or it might have been pie) but for some reason I don't have it saved

Great idea.

Can we drug test for voting, too?

Here you go bby.

>site

If I open up /arg/, will I see that rifle?

Ok let's legalize all drugs then and see how utterly fucked the population becomes.

>lets drug test people who need food
>lets not drug test people want a gun
You guys are fucking crazy. So you're saying its okay to give a lunatic drug addict a gun? If you're opposed to this, then you're saying you're opposed to background checks on purchasing a gun.

You don't have a constitutional right to food stamps.

>Fully automatic weapons are perfectly legal.
But they ARE infringed. The government infringes on them by requiring a permit and checks.
The BOR stopped mattering with guns when you idiots let the government ban your guns in exchange for legalized booze in 1933.
Oh, they also banned the possession of gold bullion and coinage, but that has since been rescinded.

The US constitution forbids all governments in the US from banning any objects or goods. That's how the document is written. The government only has permissions explicitly named in the constitution. All other rights/privileges are left to the People. The States were stricken from this clause by the Fourteenth amendment, which made all US Constitutional protection applicable to state and local laws as well.

Since the US constitution does not explicitly grant the government the right to ban the possession of ANYTHING from the People, the government has no constitutional authority to ban anything.

>commerce clause tho, hahahaha!
NOPE. That only applies to INTERSTATE COMMERCE and ONLY allows the government the right to make commerce regular(to stop price fixing and gouging basically).
The Commerce Clause does not grant the right of the government to ban any good or service.

If you people only knew how much the government openly violates their own laws, you'd be really pissed. They do it openly to your face and not only do you not fight them on it, YOU WELCOME IT!

You so-called "conservatives" sicken me. You can't even understand basic English.
>SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED*
*except for machine guns, sawn-off rifles, grenades, felons, and now drug users.

So lets lift background checks, right?

I don't post there often so no.

Hell I don't go to /k/ much anymore since it's 1/3 generals now.

When did my aunt start posting on Cred Forums?

If you have 5 bucks you can get an assload of rice and an assload of beans

Obviously it's not going to be a mouthwatering flavourful experience, but food is so amazingly fucking ridiculously cheap in the western world that the idea that someone "can't afford to eat" is ludicrous

I mean fuck, obesity is a bigger problem in the poorer communities, not the richer ones

Every place that has had legal drugs has had substantially less drug crime, which makes sense as when you make something illegal you introduce a criminal element to it.
Just imagine how fucked up it would be if cigarette addicts had to use the black market to get nicotine.

You see, in cigs, alcohol, caffeine, and the RC market, you don't find much crime outside the occasional idiot making a fool of himself.
That's because these are sold on the open market, by companies, rather than on an unregulated black market.

Nigga I hate the NFA, the '68 GCA, and the Hughes Amendment like any other reasonable /k/ommando, I was just saying that it is legal to own a machine gun, if you go through the endless bureaucratic process of the ATF.

>Not understanding what the definition of the word "Regulated" was when it was written 1791.

strawpoll.me/11290011

It's not 1/3rd generals, but the /arg/, /brg/, /akg/ and /meg/ threads do receive a fair amount of traffic tbqh.

Also, what kind of grip is that? It's not a Magpul, is it?

I honestly dont care about this one

I dont see pot smokers with guns as a problem

I do see alcoholics with guns as a problem

If I wanted a gun, I should probably be sober

Drugs aren't limited to weed.

But that red tape is legally infringement. And the Second Amendment clearly says "shall not be infringed".
The founders of the US put the Second in there for emphasis, but legally the US constitution does NOT authorize the government to ban ANYTHING, guns or otherwise.

Technically, the government banning any guns, drugs, kinder eggs, lawn darts, Skyline GTRs, etc is a violation of the US Constitution as it is worded, as said document has not authorized the government to control goods/possessions in ANY WAY.

They ain't technically allowed to ban shit, but by using lawyers and bought judiciaries, they have managed to make it assumed that they CAN.
This is because THEY control the courts and police and you are stuck sucking on anything THEY decide.

This is what happens when you don't rout out people in government who wish to overstep their authority.
Now we have a beast that's banning fucking Kratom without any laws. They're just saying "lol nope u can't have this anymore because reasons and addicts, etc."

/mag/ and another dedicated general or two as well as several failed ones that pop up for a while. I did exaggerate though. I just dislike most general threads because all they do is encourage shitposting and when you try to ask an actual question people tell you to go to the general. When you ask a question in the general they mock you for not buying their favorite meme products.

It's a B5 grip. I don't remember the model number but I'm pretty sure they only make the one.

Did I ever say that I viewed the legal red tape as being fine and not infringement? I know damn well what the constitution it, an exhaustive list of powers that the federal government has. However, if the Federal gov't didn't do it, they'd pressure states into doing it like they did with raising the drinking age.

Most people like us have their head up their ass and aren't versed on the Constitution. Sorry, I'm used to dealing with them.

Glad to see others who understand the true role of government.
They were never supposed to be the controllers, boss, master, etc.
They were supposed to be a mediator and framework for us to make a society with. A tool and no more.
To make the playing fields we citizens are on a fair and functioning one and no more. Referees if you will.

So sad so many of us actually believe the fuckers are supposed to be "in charge" and "the boss", because they're not. The founders made that VERY clear.
We didn't fight for our independence, go through a hellish civil war, and put up with all the shit and become the greatest civilization on earth to let some fag lawyers and bureaucrats ban things from us.

convince me to not vote for hillary in 10 words or less.