Oh, few issues push buttons quite like the Second Amendment, which, in truth, shouldn’t push buttons at all, right? It’s in black and white as Constitutional law, and the precedence for such a right is undeniable. But still, people bicker about it, split hairs, and grasp at straws to argue for limitations and modifications to this fundamental right. Why would this time be any different?

Enter from stage right this dude! Who believes limitations on God-given rights, like those enumerated in the Constitution, are sometimes necessary for the good of society—sound a little familiar?

“I don’t believe that I should be able to go buy a tank. That’s promotion of general welfare. That’s domestic tranquility. […] So, in my mind, the government should and ought to limit certain things. For example, I should not be able to buy a tank.”

To each their own, I suppose. I’d love to be able to buy a tank, and I do think people should be able to buy tanks. Maybe I’m in the minority.

The Second Amendment is not for hunting or sport shooting; it’s to allow for the citizenry to be armed to the teeth against the government, against any who would threaten their liberty. So, yeah, toss tanks in there, too.

Check out the entire conversation, though, to see how this kid fares in the discussion with Steven.

Get your content free from Big Tech's filter. Bookmark this website and sign up for our newsletter!