\
  The most prestigious law school admissions discussion board in the world.
BackRefresh Options Favorite

Founding Fathers didn't draft the 2nd Amendment with guntoting niggers in mind

They clearly did not mean for niggers to carry firearms. Wh...
Angry Blue Keepsake Machete Fortuitous Meteor
  07/08/25
there was that UF or something law student posted about here...
Thriller startled ratface business firm
  07/08/25
...
bearded tattoo generalized bond
  07/08/25
the founding fathers' cost-benefit analysis for allowing a r...
Angry Blue Keepsake Machete Fortuitous Meteor
  07/08/25
100% interestingly, Switzerland also has a constitutional r...
Thriller startled ratface business firm
  07/08/25
Correct. Most early “gun control” laws were spec...
Painfully Honest Razzle-dazzle Telephone
  07/08/25
...
bearded tattoo generalized bond
  07/08/25
...
Painfully Honest Razzle-dazzle Telephone
  07/09/25
Or individuals of any race. They just didn't want to threate...
Vermilion Excitant Nibblets Mood
  07/09/25
No, even the militia-minded view was an individual right to ...
mentally impaired bistre gas station
  07/09/25
...
comical cuck station
  07/09/25


Poast new message in this thread



Reply Favorite

Date: July 8th, 2025 10:41 AM
Author: Angry Blue Keepsake Machete Fortuitous Meteor

They clearly did not mean for niggers to carry firearms. Why is this never mentioned by originalists?

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5747530&forum_id=2#49082201)



Reply Favorite

Date: July 8th, 2025 10:44 AM
Author: Thriller startled ratface business firm

there was that UF or something law student posted about here a few weeks ago who wrote an article saying exactly this, that the originalist interpretation clearly means the freedom only applies to White people and was never intended for negros

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5747530&forum_id=2#49082215)



Reply Favorite

Date: July 8th, 2025 10:45 AM
Author: bearded tattoo generalized bond



(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5747530&forum_id=2#49082217)



Reply Favorite

Date: July 8th, 2025 10:53 AM
Author: Angry Blue Keepsake Machete Fortuitous Meteor

the founding fathers' cost-benefit analysis for allowing a right to bear arms clearly assumed niggers would be in cages and not allowed to get anywhere near guns, ever

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5747530&forum_id=2#49082242)



Reply Favorite

Date: July 8th, 2025 11:01 AM
Author: Thriller startled ratface business firm

100%

interestingly, Switzerland also has a constitutional right to bear arms *FOR CITIZENS* (it's a very heavily armed country), but the law also specifically *bans* foreigners of certain enumerated nationalities (a bunch of muslim and black african countries) resident in the country from owning arms

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5747530&forum_id=2#49082265)



Reply Favorite

Date: July 8th, 2025 11:37 AM
Author: Painfully Honest Razzle-dazzle Telephone

Correct. Most early “gun control” laws were specifically created with that purpose.

Hilariously, California had to cite some of these laws to defend its own shitlib gun control laws due to Thomas’ “history and tradition” test created in Bruen: https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2024-02-07/if-we-must-rely-on-history-and-tradition-to-assess-gun-laws-does-racist-history-count . Of course they added an “ith tho rathist” disclaimer.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5747530&forum_id=2#49082362)



Reply Favorite

Date: July 8th, 2025 11:39 AM
Author: bearded tattoo generalized bond



(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5747530&forum_id=2#49082369)



Reply Favorite

Date: July 9th, 2025 1:40 AM
Author: Painfully Honest Razzle-dazzle Telephone



(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5747530&forum_id=2#49085166)



Reply Favorite

Date: July 9th, 2025 1:42 AM
Author: Vermilion Excitant Nibblets Mood

Or individuals of any race. They just didn't want to threaten state militia since there was no national army yet

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5747530&forum_id=2#49085168)



Reply Favorite

Date: July 9th, 2025 2:22 AM
Author: mentally impaired bistre gas station

No, even the militia-minded view was an individual right to own weapons suitable for militia use, because they also viewed the militia as checking state authority.

Here's an 1840 case taking this view https://guncite.com/court/state/21tn154.html ("If the citizens have these arms in their hands, they are prepared in the best possible manner to repel any encroachments upon their rights by those in authority.")

BTW, what army did George Washington command?

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5747530&forum_id=2#49085182)



Reply Favorite

Date: July 9th, 2025 6:40 AM
Author: comical cuck station



(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5747530&forum_id=2#49085300)