John SHREDS 2nd Amendment Fanatics

John SHREDS 2nd Amendment Fanatics

#Shorts #TYT #News #Politics #CenkUyger #JohnIadarola #2ndAmendment #guns #gunlaws #gundebate

[ashleymcclain]

Your right. We should be allowed to own fully auto ARs

[richardanderson]

The second amendment says that my right shall not be infringed. That means there is no line. Any law restricting guns is unconstitutional.

[joshuastrawser]

He's not making the argument he thinks he is there. He's making the exact same argument that says that the National Firearms Act of 1934 is unconstitutional.

[mindyourbusiness]

We should be able to have the same guns the government has. During the revolutionary war civilians had cannons.

[eagle]

People like him are the reason why the 2nd Amendment exists

[joecoolchicago]

He didn’t shred shit. The 2nd Amendment is to resist government, government has big guns

[SM-mqrv]

Right to bear arms shall not be infringed

[jRex]

Our founding fathers would be disappointed with a man like John

[jasonsaenz]

Who said I can't have any of those things? I just don't have the money to get it that's the difference. John shredded nothing he made no point

[javelinblue]

"Arms." That's where it is.

[TheMexlalo]

2nd Amendment is part of the
BILL OF RIGHTS (the first 10 amendments are individual Rights)
It's about people Defending themselves against Tyranny.

The founding fathers where against a Large powerful government.
In fact threw out American history civilian's had had better weapons than State Military.
It was around Vietnam war when the tables turned and The U.S MILITARY started to get the upper hand.
John needs to study What weapons are and study the Bill of Rights before opening his mouth

[cousinles]

You can buy a fully auto, you can buy a bazooka, you can buy a tank, fighter jet, etc.

[chuimendoza]

The only thing john has been shredding since he joined the TYT is his masculinity

[DKTraining]

The title should be "Clown Show never learned his Constitution".

[bird]

Lol yeah right. The government cannot legally restrict the people from owning a certain caliber. Doing so would directly be an infringement of our right to bear arms. Don't be confused: the people can own XM5s, AK-103s, M249s, grenades, MANPADS, NLAWs, tanks, artillery, armed jets, warships. The only barrier is money and current infringements for some of these.

[RevRod]

Exactly. The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. There is not line.

[bigchomnk]

You actually can own everything that he mentioned.

[jameswhite]

You’re absolutely right. Citizens have the constitutional right to own everything you just mentioned, but the 2A has been infringed on for so long that we can’t

[docstew]

Which particular word in the First Amendment gives you the right to post this on the internet? The First Amendment says NOTHING about the internet, so where do you get the right to post this? Or is it that technology advances, but the principles of freedom and liberty remain the same?

[sand-paper-pistol-grips]

I used to work for a guy who hated guns and the 2nd Amendment. He said that The 2nd Amendment only applied to muzzle-loaded single-shot flintlock rifles and pistols, which were in common use at the time that The Constitution was written, and that if The Founding Fathers of this country could have foreseen AR-15s, semi-automatic pistols, and other firearms that are commonly available to the general public in this day and time, that they would have never written The 2nd Amendment.

If that’s true, then the "freedom of speech" and "freedom of the press" clauses of the 1st Amendment only apply to the spoken word of mouth, sign language, the handwritten word, and a printing press that turns out only one page at a time when the handle is pulled, because those were the methods of communication at the time The Constitution was written. If The Founding Fathers could have foreseen in their wildest dreams or hallucinations, the telegraph, the telephone, the radio, television, cellular telephones, computers, and the Internet, they would have never written the "freedom of speech" and "freedom of the press" clauses in The 1st Amendment either.

Our rights supersede any available and/or advancing technology.