Supreme Court Extends Right to Bear Arms to Include Personal Tanks

By Jordana Lorrimer ‘28
After serious conversations and debates, the Supreme Court has made the controversial and groundbreaking decision to extend the right to bear arms to include personal tanks. 

After witnessing hundreds of mass shootings over the past year, the Court decided that it was better to blow people up rather than shoot them with dozens of rounds. Many conservatives felt reassured by this choice and their only complaint was not having this before. 
Freshman Noah Cytrynbaum said, “What’s next? Fighter jets?”
Some are also proposing the legalization of personal fighter jets. 
This decision was strongly based on the fact that there are no federal laws against the possession of a military-grade assault rifle in most American states, as well as the lack of law against the sale and manufacturing of them.  Despite the fact these weapons are commonly used in mass shootings, including  219 incidents of gunfire on school grounds this year, and numerous terrorist attacks all over America, the government believes it would be more suitable to allow personal tanks on school property. Regardless that personal tanks are usually unpredictable war machines, the court perceived tanks as just as lethal as guns. 
Whereas before, many argued that they needed assault rifles for hunting, now hunters can blow up a deer instead of putting 120 rounds into it. Some might argue this takes the fun out of the so-called sport, while others argue that it gets the same end result. 
One hunter argued, “Yeah, I’m okay with it. I kinda liked seeing Bamby’s blood pouring out of her but I’d rather blow her up and find her a mile away.”
Some believe that teachers should be taught to use and fire Rocket Propelled Grenades in case a tank enters the school grounds. Schools throughout America suffer from shootings and bomb threats but now realize the power of RPGs compared to handguns. 
The immediate issue raised by allowing personal tanks is DUI measures, if it should fall under the same punishment as just drunk driving in a normal vehicle. If so, that is completely ignoring the risk imposed by having cannons attached to a trunk ready to off at any given moment.
Elon Musk seized the opportunity and announced his newest project known as a “Tesla Tank”, which looks undoubtedly like a cyber truck. Soon after this announcement Musk quickly tweeted, “Why stop at electric cars when you can have an electric tank? Zero emissions, 100% intimidation.”
    According to the 2nd Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, “A well-regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” For hundreds of years after its creation, Americans forgot about the “Well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State,” referring to the military, and argued that they should be allowed personal guns of all kinds. 
    Questions are being raised about if law enforcement will need tanks or armored vehicles to replace their cars. Some have said that local police forces would need attack helicopters and even war drones. 
    One man commented, “I mean, who cares? If I get shot by the cops or blown up by them, I’m still dead.” 
    Climate activists are warning that America’s car dependency will shift to tank dependency and continue to worsen the climate crisis.