That is written in the Second Amendment ~ the part where it says "it's OK to "bear arms" against any and all intruders, particularly dopers.
You must have missed the part about repelling enemies, setting standards, regulating interstate commerce, and collecting taxes.
None of those enumerated powers give governments the ability to ignore the Constitution in order to prohibit/'outlaw' property like guns & drugs. -- Did you 'miss' that?
Plus, and this is very important and gets to the heart of the matter, the drug legalization [anti-prohibition] people don't really want the government to remove the heavy hand of coercion from their necks ~ nosirreebob ~ they want it lifted up and placed on the rest of us to keep us from protecting ourselves against them.
Not true in that you can protect yourself from 'addicts' of every stripe by allowing them to over-use their easily available poison. Alcoholics die young when left alone.
Hmmm ~ typical junky talk.
Typical 'junk' reply by an advocate of anti-constitutional prohibitions.
Onliest way I can think of to deal with junkies quick and easy, and at minimal expense, should there be even the slightest disturbance of my pleasure of my own property, is to shoot them.
Lotsa bluster from a guy that believes in the power of governments to 'ban' property. Where would you get your gun to shoot 'junkies' once your government prohibited other 'dangerous & evil' items of property like firearms? --- And even more apropos, where would ~you~ get the guts to defy big brother?
That is written in the Second Amendment ~ the part where it says "it's OK to "bear arms" against any and all intruders, particularly dopers.
Sure, pretend like someone here is against your right to shoot intruders. -- Whatta joke.