• TriflingToad@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    edit-2
    1 day ago

    how is it legal to stop people from wearing bulletproof vests in public!? Why aren’t 2nd amendment mfs screaming about this?

    • Bytemeister@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      1 day ago

      “See, the second amendment specifically says you have a right to bear arms, and that means any kind of gun I want to buy should be legal.”

      “However, there is no amendment saying you have a right to wear armor. So being protected isn’t a constitutional right”.

      “Oh? This supressor I want to put on my gun? That should be allowed by the second amendment. Wait, what do you mean there is no constitutional right to gun accessories?!”

      It usually goes something like that. I’d like to point out here that there isn’t a constitutional right to wear pants or eat bacon either.

      • EndlessNightmare@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        13 hours ago

        It usually goes something like that. I’d like to point out here that there isn’t a constitutional right to wear pants or eat bacon either.

        One could similarly say that the right to wield violence does not mean that you have the right for that violence to actually succeed. Some situations allow for the legal use of deadly force, but that still does not mean the explicit right to kill. If a threat is neutralized and they survive, you can’t “make sure” that they don’t.