so, what do you think about this washington, dc 2nd amendment case going before the supreme court?
well, i believe the 2nd amendment is outdated, even if it is determined to protect an individual right to keep and bear arms
i mean, an armed citizenry could never win against a modern army.
wait... aren't you the one that recently told me that we could never win against the insurgents in iraq?
Post this bitstrip:
(close)
You must publish your strip before embedding/posting it
Flag this Strip:
(close)
Please sign up to flag this comic.
|
|
|
|
Put this Bitstrip on a product:
 Shirts
|
Mugs
|
Coasters
|
Playing Cards
|
Prints
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2 comments
Add a comment
The 2nd Amendment was designed to protect an individual right to keep and bear arms, so that a militia force could always be raised in time of need to fight tyranny foreign or domesic. At the time, people were called to keep a musket, ammo, powder, etc. at hand. Translating that to a modern militia, the weapon would be any small arm, such as an M-16, AK-47, handgun, and so on. The rockets and mortars can be obtained in time of need from a national guard armory... essentially like the Iraqi insurgents did it, and how the Afganistan rebels won out (with US help) against the Soviets.
May 5, '08
SodaBob
Oh, good! I didn't realise the 2nd amendment permitted us to keep AK-47s, rockets and mortars. We're safe, then!
May 5, '08
Vi Paravane