2nd Amendment should cover weaponized drones

I feel the 2nd Amendment should cover weaponized drones, and while I'm on this topic it should also cover PCs and internet access (as hacking is a new theater of battle against states as well).

I also think Republicans are a bit hypocritical when they say gun-free zones are targets but at the gun-free recruitment center was an illegally armed Marine/Navy(?) guy whose gun accomplished nothing and saved no one.

I support the 2nd Amendments, just not Republicans, their IQ is dismal.

FederalFarmer I'm serious...like mount some M-80s on the drones and use them as kamikaze, if we need to fight an oppressive government that will be more effective than a rifle these days.

I think the Third Amendment should apply to spyware and other cyber weapons. If you have the right not to have a lieutenant living in your house, you have the right not to have the NSA living in your laptop.

That actually could be a somewhat compelling if convoluted argument.

Glenn Reynolds wrote a law review article on whether the 3rd Amendment would have "penumbras", and concluded that it should. It struck me that spyware should be one of those penumbras.

One of the dumbass arguments I've read about the second amendment is that it was meant to equalize the citizenry against the government to protect against oppression.

Gun Grabbers: "The second amendment was written at a time when there were only flintlocks, so why should citizens be allowed to own semi-automatics?"

Gun Nuts: "Well, that's all there was at that time in history. Today, the government has all kinds of cool weapons that I masturbate frequently to."

Me: "Okay assholes... so using your logic, why aren't citizens allowed to own intercontinental ballistic nuclear missiles?"

Gun Nuts:

Yep. The only way a citizen militia beats federal forces is if federal forces decline to engage. And that's almost certainly what would happen if the militia was clearly holding the moral high ground. They usually aren't.

In general, the Second Amendment has never covered vehicles.

A ballistic nuclear missile is not a vehicle, and is actually a projectile more akin to a bullet. I want one.

A tank is certainly a vehicle though. As is a frigate.

Oh look, a new alt account.

Of course Federal Fuckface and Captain Anime disagree with me. They're probably jacking off to their firearms cache as I type this.

If Tweetle Dumb and Tweetle Dumber start agreeing with you, that's when you know you're on the wrong track.