Should an amendment to the bill of rights have been made that the government could not ban ownership of anything you could possibly own?

Welcome • User Guide
ToS • Privacy • Canary
Donate • Bugs • License

©2025 Poal.co

978

•

If guns were never supposed to be bannable, then what else would the government ever need to ban? Why not just double down and say the government could never ban ANYTHING of your possible ownership?

It would also double as a second 2A as well.

If guns were never supposed to be bannable, then what else would the government ever need to ban? Why not just double down and say the government could never ban ANYTHING of your possible ownership? It would also double as a second 2A as well.

(post is archived)

You are currently inside a comment thread.

Click here to see all the comments (6).

[–] [deleted] • 1 pt

Laws and rights are man-made constructs so it doesn't matter. You could piss all over the constitution and make a new one with the right support.

link