![The True Face Of The Kike [542x986 - 276KB]](https://pic8.co/sh/Qsb8tz.png){kind=link}
Your 2a explicitly states that firearms need militia to be effective.
Without organization training and leadership guns are no match to soldiers.
This us why American leaders have been death upon militia
Your 2a explicitly states that firearms need militia to be effective.
You're reading that backwards. Militias are necessary to the security of a free state, the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. It is the militia who need guns, not the guns who need a militia.
organization training and leadership guns are no match to soldiers
Tell this to partisans, nva, taliban, etc throughout history. If I needed to hold an area over an extended period 20 yokel locals are preferable to 4 trained soldiers. In practice, the numbers and sympathies are with the militias and their population rather than a standing army. At one point the west was airdropping single shot pistols into occupied territory because all you have to do is get the drop on one person and take their weapon then you're as well equipped as they are.
Taliban and partisans are militia.
My point is guns are not enough by themselves. The founders knew this
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.
Every citizen is part of that Militia, thus it is every citizen's duty to be ready to fight for their country, and to defend themselves. It is necessary to the security of a FREE STATE.
When you live in a free state you can comment on what the 2nd amendment means, until then the concept is foreign to you.
(post is archived)