• Royal_Bitch_Pudding@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    Iirc there was already some cases that decided that the government does have to right to decide what types of weapons you can own.

    • SheeEttin@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      And what kind of speech you can say. For example, hate speech, incitements to violence, and of course yelling “fire” in a crowded theater.

      • BombOmOm@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        14
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        yelling “fire” in a crowded theater

        Is part of an overturned court case. And even before it was overturned, the limit wasn’t that you couldn’t yell ‘fire’, the limit was you couldn’t create harm people via your actions. (Ex, if there was a fire, you did nothing illegal by saving others).

        To circle this back to the 2nd Amendment. One can own and carry a gun, one can even save others with their firearm, one cannot murder people.

      • AngrilyEatingMuffins@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        Hate speech is legal and incitement to violence has to be imminently dangerous. AFAIK all limitations of speech have to do with immediate public safety

      • CmdrShepard@lemmy.one
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        1 year ago

        And numerous forms of protest too. Anything that gains traction is then declared a “riot” or “illegal assembly” and dealt with harshly.

        None of these 2A supporters seem to care that you need a permit to protest or register to vote, but ask for people to get even the most basic of training before purchasing an object specifically designed to kill people and suddenly its “but muh rights!”