That would turn driving into a video game!

Don't forget talking to the kids in the back seat. That is FAR worse than texting and driving or drinking and driving. Ban children from cars and will reduce the number of fatalities even more!

Its an assault vehicle dammit!

The same reason they don't want their own citizens to have guns.

Learn? You can spend 5 minutes on google and figure it out.

This is where you are wrong. I will give you a chance to elaborate if you like, but I will make the argument that the availability of automatic and semi-automatic weapons are imperative.

I would venture to guess that almost every troop would disobey an order to fire on a group of US citizens. My second week at Parris Island included several days of that exact discussion. Every member of the military is trained to disobey an unlawful order.

I am entitled to have guns! why is the government not issuing them! Sorry for diving in on the conversation, just thought I would add a little half-wit humor.

Just imagine where we would be if that were actually true... NHS! Free healthcare!
If you believe that we could not fight the government and win, you have already lost.

Are you from Jamaica?

It is not censorship, as they are a private company. They have the right to do as they please. I definitely hate the idea that there is some belief that their removal of a drawing is the right thing to do, but who am I to argue? As long as everyone else is reacting to what just happened, we have the ability to push through something else. Yeah, politicians are the worst scum. It is a shame that they wouldn't go out and stare at a nuclear bomb landing on them.

It seems like divide and conquer; unfortunately both sides enjoy the conflict. While the peons argue about little things, we will start taking away the big ones. It is great... no one will ever notice.

Nice rant! I would like an answer to a few questions though. Why not have guns? Why not have lots of them? What part of the second amendment gives you the idea that they were not considering the possibility of an improvement in technology?

You specifically said that the reason for the amendment was to protect from tyrannical government, and then asked which one. This is very simple to answer. Which tyrannical government? ANY... Ours(local state or national), or yours. It is unreasonable to think that the protection provided by the amendment expires because the capabilities of the weapons advance. If you are to defend against this tyrannical government, should you not have the ability to acquire the means?

I also have a polite request... It is OUR constitution, not "the constitution".

While it is the logic mechanism of the weapon, it is not the action. I could load a .223 round into a sawed off barrel of an AR-15 and strike it with a hammer(framing type, with the claw on the back) and send it down range. On most weapons, the lower is the only truly interchangeable part and makes it completely irrelevant.

Or pack it with fertilizer and diesel fuel.