The Libs Will Try to Ban Free Speech Next

You’ve probably heard some of these salty arguments :

• Guns Shoot 200 Times Faster Than At The Time Of The 2nd Amendment
• What ‘arms’ looked like when the 2nd Amendment was written
• Here’s What Firearms Looked Like When The Founding Fathers Wrote The Second Amendment – They Had Muskets; We Have AR-15s

Here’s an excerpt from one of the above mentioned article :

“Semiautomatic firearms technology didn’t exist in any meaningful sense in the era of the founding fathers.

They had something much different in mind when they drafted the Second Amendment.

The typical firearms of the day were muskets and flintlock pistols. They could hold a single round at a time, and a skilled shooter could hope to get off three or possibly four rounds in a minute of firing. By all accounts they were not particularly accurate either.

Compare those specifications with the capabilities of a modern-day AR-15. According to the makers of one model of the gun, a good shooter can effectively fire 45 rounds per minute. The guns are stable and accurate at distances five to 10 times farther than a typical Second Amendment-era gun. Standard magazines can hold 30 rounds, and shooters can swap out magazines and continue firing in just a matter of seconds.

In short, guns today are capable of inflicting far more carnage than anything the framers could have imagined.”

To sum up : The Libs claim that when our founding fathers enacted the 2nd amendment, they couldn’t have foreseen the technological advancements of firearms. Hence U.S. people nowadays should nullify the 2nd amendment.

Such convenient logic.
 

What would happen if we apply this same reasoning to Freedom of Speech?

The above excerpt is modified to :

“Semiautomatic firearms technology Social media and the internet didn’t exist in any meaningful sense in the era of the founding fathers.

They had something much different in mind when they drafted the Second First Amendment.

The typical firearms communication channel of the day were muskets and flintlock pistols printing press and our mouths. They could hold a single round at a time, and a skilled shooter could hope to get off three or possibly four rounds in a minute of firing. Printing press at the time could produce about 480 impressions per hour. By all accounts they were not particularly accurate fast to distribute either.

Compare those specifications with the capabilities of a modern day AR-15 internet. According to the makers of one model of the gun, a good shooter can effectively fire 45 rounds per minute. The guns are stable and accurate at distances five to 10 times farther than a typical Second Amendment-era gun. Standard magazines can hold 30 rounds, and shooters can swap out magazines and continue firing in just a matter of seconds. According to business insider, over 400 hours of videos are uploaded on to YouTube every minute, which equates to a staggering 24,000 hours of every hour. These videos are content-rich and are much more accessible than a typical First Amendment-era publication. And we haven’t started blabbering about Facebook, Twitter, Google and other internet sources yet.

In short, guns free speech today are capable of inflicting far more carnage than anything the framers could have imagined.”

Judging from how the logic applies, one can deduce that the left are after our free speech. And with more imaginative analogy, perhaps they could also be after our right to vote (when things are not in their favor, obviously) and our right for fair trial.